RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. JAI BHAGWAN SAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed by the defendant as his application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC had been dismissed.

(2.) The basic facts necessary for disposal of the revision are being given. The plaintiff and the defendants are legal heirs of late Rehtu Ram. The plaintiff filed a suit laying challenge to the decree dated 09.02.1976 and it was pleaded to be collusive. The plaintiff was seeking declaration and joint possession of properties and plot allotted under the ousted quota. He was also seeking directions to the defendants to pay back 1/7th share of compensation received by defendant No. 1 from HUDA, consequent upon acquisition of their land. The plaintiff was asserting that the property was ancestral and he had a right in it by birth.

(3.) The defendants filed their written statement. In the written statement filed by defendants No. 3 to 5, legal objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, non-joinder, estoppel, limitation, res judicata were raised. It was pleaded that the suit was based on fraud and the property was not ancestral and defendant No. 1 had acquired share in the property by Civil Court decree and Rehtu Ram had suffered a decree in 1981 regarding his half share in favour of Raghbir Singh and Raghbir Singh became the full owner. It was pleaded that the plaintiff fell in bad company and Rehtu Ram asked all his sons to severe all connections with him. It was pleaded that a civil suit had been filed by the plaintiff and some suits were filed by Raghbir and a compromise was effected in 1989. It was pleaded that plaintiff along with defendant No. 4 attacked and caused injuries to Sewa Ram defendant and a case was registered and the plaintiff along with others was convicted and an appeal was filed which was disposed of in 1999. It was pleaded that the plaintiff filed another suit in 2003 which was compromised and the plaintiff had admitted that the property was self acquired property of Rehtu Ram.