RAM KISHAN Vs. PATIYA RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING failed to get a favourable decision from learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal ('trial court', for brevity) and learned Additional District Judge, Karnal ('first appellate court', for brevity), unsuccessful plaintiff (here -in -after referred to as, 'the appellant') is before this Court in regular second appeal.

(2.) AS per appellant's case land measuring 02 Kanals 04 Marlas comprised in Khewat No. 267, Khatauni No. 349, Khasra No. 03/02(02 -04) was ownership of "Gram Panchayat Deh Vassi Deh" but was reserved for "Gair Mumkin Bara", was recorded to be in possession of "Harijan" community of village Uncha Samana, was divided into twelve "Baras" about twenty years back and the "Bara" (No. 02) shown in red colour in the site plan (Exhibit P2) (here -in -after referred to as, 'the suit property') had fallen to his share while "Bara" (No. 09) shown in blue colour in the site plan (Exhibit P2) had fallen to the share of defendant/respondent No. 01, Patiya Ram, father of defendants/respondents No. 02 and 03 but the respondents wanted to illegally and by force usurp the suit property whereupon he had planted a "Beri" (jujuba) tree. He had moved a complaint before the police and a "Panchayat" convened by him had observed that he was in possession of the suit property.

(3.) AFTER a replication was filed by the appellant to deny all what was said in the written statement and to reiterate his plea as contained in the plaint, learned trial court, from the pleadings of the parties, identified the areas of conflict in the form of following issues: