JASWANT SINGH Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal by defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 10.03.2010 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Dasuya whereby suit for partition filed by respondent -plaintiff has been decreed and against the judgment and decree dated 01.07.2013 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur whereby appeal preferred by appellant -defendant has been dismissed. For convenience sake, hereinafter, reference to parties is being made as per their status in the suit.

(2.) THE detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the courts below and are not required to be reproduced. In brief, the facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that the property, fully described in the head -note of plaint and shown in site plan attached with plaint, are joint ownership of the parties and they have raised construction tentatively just to fulfill the routine necessity and they are in possession of the same as per the site plan. Some of the properties shown in the site plan were situated within the red line area of the village and some other property bears khasra numbers as per the revenue record. No legal partition has yet taken place in respect of the suit property till date. The plaintiff was in possession of the lesser area than his due share and so he was not able to enjoy the full benefits of the joint property. The plaintiff had requested the defendant to partition the suit property but to no avail. It was further pleaded that the defendant had constructed house in the part of the land comprised in khasra no.137//1, 60// and 137//3, whereas, the plaintiff had started raising construction in the land comprised in khasra no.340. The defendant had unnecessarily filed a civil suit seeking a decree for permanent injunction against the plaintiff. It was further pleaded that southern side of the property shown with letters EIDI, AI, BI, CI, FI abuts the metalled road leading towards village Mehtabpur and portion of this property abutting the metalled road had also commercial value for construction of shop.

(3.) ON the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Court of first instance framed following issues: