KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. SATISH KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17th April, 1990 passed by the Additional District Judge Sangrur, by which the appeal filed by the Plaintiffs -Respondents was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 28th November, 1987 passed by the trial Court (dismissing the suit filed by the Plaintiffs -Respondents) was set aside and the suit filed by the Plaintiffs -Respondents was decreed.

(2.) THE facts of the case, as given in the plaint, are that the property, including the suit property, was jointly owned by the Plaintiffs and Defendants Parkash Chand and Panna Lal, but the same was partitioned orally on 23rd August, 1959; that the suit property as well as some other property fell to the share of the Plaintiffs; that the partition effected was consented to by Daropadi also; that the suit property which fell to the share of the Plaintiffs, however, was allowed to be retained by. Parkash Chand Defendant for 15 years and the latter was to relinquish possession of the suit property (shop) thereafter in favour of the former. That, since possession of the suit property was not surrendered by Defendant Parkash Chand, a suit was filed for possession as well as for recovery of Rs. 1,800 towards damages for Use and occupation for the period from 1st October, 1980 to 31st October, 1983 at the rate of Rs. 50 per month.

(3.) DEFENDANT Panna Lal admitted the factum of oral partition, as pleaded in the plaint, but denied the other averments affecting him adversely. He also pleaded that he was arrayed improperly as no real had been claimed against him.