KURDA RAM Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-plaintiff Kurda Ram has filed this regular second appeal against Municipal Council, Narnaul, Executive Officer, Kishan Lal, Bhajan Lal, Sajan Singh and Smt.Anari respondents-defendants challenging the impugned judgment and decree dated 16.09.2010 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division) Narnaul vide which the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant for possession was dismissed and also the judgment and decree dated 14.07.2014 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Narnaul vide which the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-appellant Kurda Ram filed a suit against respondents-defendants Municipal Council, Narnaul and others for possession stating therein that Nathu and Gumani left a joint passage for their personal use to approach to their houses and no other person had got any concern with the said passage. It is pleaded that after death of Nathu and grand father of plaintiff-appellant, the passage is being used by defendants No.3 to 6 and plaintiff. The defendants in collusion with the officials of Municipal Council, started creating evidence showing the said portion as common passage. It is further alleged that defendant No.6 executed a forged sale deed dated 11.12.2001 in favour of defendant No.5 showing the disputed portion as a common passage and defendants also opened door illegally and forcibly towards the portion owned and possessed by plaintiff. It is also pleaded that defendants No.3 to 6 in collusion with official defendants also got constructed a road illegally and forcibly in the joint passage and sahan owned by plaintiff.

(3.) On the other hand, the case of the defendants No.3 to 6 in their written statement is that site plan of plaintiff is not correct. They also denied the joint passage of Nathu and Gumani alone. They stated about the existence of public street and Municipal Council road and drains, which are being repaired by Municipal Council from time to time. It is also stated that portion shown with red colour was part of nazul land which earlier vested in Government and now the same vests in Municipal Council. It is further stated that gate of house of Sajjan Singh opens on the road which has not been shown by the plaintiff in the site plan.