BALWINDER SINGH Vs. BACHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The conatus with an endeavour to minimize the miseries of a poor-man inflicted by the defendants-appellants while deploying a stratagem and successfully misleading this Court since 20.03.1996 uptill now.

(2.) Defendants-appellants have filed the present Regular Second Appeal against the impugned judgment and decree dated 11.01.1996 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar, here-in-referred as "First Appellate Court" while dismissing their appeal against the judgment and decree dated 09.11.1993 passed by learned Additional Senior Sub Judge, Ajnala, here-in-after referred as "trial Court" thereby, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for possession and permanent injunction has been affirmed.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for possession with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants-appellants from raising any construction and removing the trees from the suit land measuring 7 kanal 2 marla situated in village Bhindi Saidan, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar. It is the pleaded case of the plaintiff-respondent that earlier Central Government was the owner of the suit land and the same was purchased by him in a 'restricted auction' from the Government of Punjab for an amount of Rs. 8,200/- being the highest bidder on 24.08.1990 and the entire payment was made on 19.11.1990. Consequently, a sale certificate dated 24.12.1991 (Ex. P-1) was issued by Tehsildar (Sales), Ajnala. After issuance of the sale certificate, the mutation of the land in question was sanctioned in favour of the plaintiff-respondent and thus, he became the absolute owner of the suit land. The defendants/appellants without there being any right, title or interest, forcibly and illegally dispossessed the plaintiff-respondent two months prior to the filing of the civil suit and they have bent upon to raise the construction over the suit land, hence necessitated to filing of the civil suit. Upon notice, the defendants-appellants appeared and filed their written statement by raising preliminary objections inter alia submitted that the defendants-appellants are in cultivating possession of the suit land for the last so many years as tenant under Central Government and paying rent and as such, the plaintiff-respondent has no locus standi and thus, the suit is not maintainable.