BABLI Vs. USHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT regular second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 25.05.2009 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ganaur whereby suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for permanent injunction has been dismissed, as well as, against the judgment and decree dated 21.04.2011 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat whereby appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff has also been dismissed. For convenience sake, hereinafter parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Court of first instance.

(2.) THE detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, brief facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction on the ground that father of the plaintiff and defendant nos. 5 to 7 were owners in possession of land measuring 4 kanals 3 marlas, fully detailed in the plaint, situated in the area of Village Ganaur. Father of the plaintiff had died on 27.08.2000 and the property of father of the plaintiff devolved upon the plaintiff, defendant nos. 5 to 7 and mother of the plaintiff. Mutation dated 25.09.2001 was sanctioned. Mother of the plaintiff and defendants no. 5 to 7 had died on 03.06.2002. Thereafter, the property devolved upon the plaintiff and defendant nos. 5 to 7. The land is joint. Plaintiff and defendant nos. 5 to 7 are in possession in equal shares. However, defendant nos. 1 to 4 got evil eyes over the land owned by the plaintiff. It was pleaded that defendant no.5, brother of the plaintiff, is involved in bad company and has become addicted to vices. Defendant no.5 in collusion with defendant nos. 1 to 4 tried to usurp the land of the plaintiff by all means.

(3.) UPON notice, defendants appeared and filed separate written statement. Defendant no.1 in her written statement took various preliminary objections. It has been averred that father of the plaintiff had sold out land in dispute to various persons during his life time and therefore, plaintiff and defendant nos. 5 to 7 have no right over the suit land. The suit land was self -acquired property of Duli Chand. It has been further averred that possession of suit land was delivered to various vendees as per sale deeds. A plot measuring 200 sq. yards was sold to Smt. Krishna Chaudhary, predecessor -in -interest of defendant no.1 vide sale deed dated 18.05.1965, which was registered on 02.06.1965 for a consideration of Rs. 1500/ -. Thereafter, the same was sold to Renu Chawla vide sale deed dated 02.07.1999 and then to defendant no.1 vide sale deed dated 19.07.2001 for a consideration of Rs. 82,000/ -. That possession was also delivered at the time of execution of sale deed and since then, defendant no.1 is in possession. It has been further averred that father of plaintiff had also sold out 3 -2/3 marlas of land vide registered sale deed dated 24.10.1990 to Sh. Deep Chand, father of defendant no.4. Various plots were sold out of land in dispute after carving out the colony named Vishnu Puri, Ganaur Mandi. Since entire land was sold by father of the plaintiff, no land in the name of the plaintiff is left out. It has been further averred that plaintiff has filed the suit in collusion with defendant nos. 5 to 7 as defendant no.5 had earlier filed a suit for permanent injunction against Suresh, husband of defendant no.1 at Civil Court Ganaur titled as "Vishu Dutt vs. Suresh Kumar", in respect of suit land which was purchased by defendant no.1 vide sale deed dated 19.07.2001. Since defendant no.5 failed to get stay order against defendant no.1, plaintiff has filed present suit only to harass defendant no.1.