(1.) This judgement will dispose of regular second appeal No. 1193 of 1989 and cross objection No. 12/C of 1989.
(2.) Plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from closing in any way or from interfering in the use of the stair case shown as ABCD in the site plan attached to the plaint. According to the plaintiff and Brij Lal, husband of Kaushalya Devi & father-in-law of Kamla Devi defendant were the owners of the house in equal shares. House was partitioned between the plaintiff and Brij Lal. Besides the house partitioned there was a vacant land measuring 22'-10"x 6'-9" at the back of the house which remained joint. According to the plaintiff sometime in the year 1959 there was an oral partition of the aforesaid vacant land and then with the consent of Kaushalya Devi he constructed a stair case in the centre of the said vacant land at his own expense. He also constructed a room in the side of the stair case. However, it was decided between him and Kaushalya Devi that the stair case shall remain joint property of the parties and since then the plaintiff is using the same for going to the first floor of his house without any obstruction. It is further case of the plaintiff that Kaushalya Devi has sold a portion of her house, who has now threatened that she will not permit the plaintiff to use the stair case. Hence the present suit.
(3.) The defendant in her written statement replied/controverted the various material averments made in the complaint. Defendant denied that there was any joint vacant site at the back of these houses. Defendant also denied that there was any oral partition of any such vacant site or that she had permitted the plaintiff to construct the stair case, as stated. Rather, it was asserted that the stair case has infact been built by her. In addition there to the defendant averred that there was yet another compromise deed dated 13.12.1982 and as per this compromise deed stair in dispute is exclusively owned and possessed by the defendant.