OMA DEVI Vs. SANATAN DHARAM SABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are aggrieved of the order dated 11.02.2014 vide which their application under Order 21 Rule 29 CPC pleading for stay of the proceedings in execution was declined. The facts may be noticed in brief.

(2.) THE respondent Sanatan Dharam Sabha, Guru Daronacharya Mandir, Bhim Nagar, Gurgaon which is a registered Society filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and possession alleging that the predecessor -in -interest of the present petitioners (arrayed as defendants in the suit) were unauthorized occupants thereof on the basis of collusive decree suffered in their favour in the year 1994. It was pleaded that the suit property fell within the municipal limits of Gurgaon and decree dated 04.01.1994 in Civil Suit No. 481 of 1994 passed in favour of defendant No. 1 - Prabhu Dayal was illegal, null and void. As a consequential relief, they sought a restraint upon the defendants from raising further construction in the suit property and from alienating it. They also pleaded for possession. The property was described both on the strength of a site plan and revenue record and was stated to be a part and parcel of Khasra No. 1318 and 1319 in village Gurgaon. It was pleaded that initially this area which fell in the village was now within the municipal limits of Gurgaon and part of Bhim Nagar and a temple with ancient idols existed there. It was also stated that there was a Dharamshala, a Pond, a School, a Piao and some shops.

(3.) THE petitioners who contested the suit as defendants stated that Moti Ram son of Bihari Lal, one of the defendants was in possession of the property for the last 30 years and had, thus, acquired ownership on the basis of adverse possession.