RAM SARAN Vs. MEHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ram Saran and others, appellants, filed a suit for permanent injunction praying that Mehar Singh and others, defendants, be restrained from cutting 40 mango trees standing in the land bearing old Khasra No. 379 and new Khasra No. 21/29 in the area of village Shahpur, Tehsil Naraingarh, on the grounds that one Multan Singh, father of plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2, Mukhtiar Singh, father of plaintiff Nos. 3 and 4, Munshi Ram, father of plaintiff No. 5, and Mukh Ram, father of defendant Nos. 4 and 5, were owners in possession of the land in dispute, that they had three-fourth share in the mango orchard which existed on the land in dispute, that the remaining one-fourth share was owned by Babu Ram and Ram Saran, who sold their share to defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in 1957, that Multan Singh, Mukhtiar Singh and Munshi Ram mortgaged the property in favour of one Raghunandan and later on transferred the same in his favour by means of a registered sale-deed dated December 15, 1928, for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos. 4 and 5 filed a suit against the successor-in-interest of Raghunandan for a declaration to the effect that the sale was not binding on them, that the suit was decreed to the extent that joint possession of one-fourth share of land was given straightaway to defendant Nos. 4 and 5 and regarding the remaining land a declaration was given that the mortgage and sale would not bind the reversionary rights of the plaintiffs, that after the aforesaid decree was passed, defendant Nos. 4 and 5 got possession of land to the extent of 3/16th share, that during the consolidation proceedings the land upon which 40 mango trees existed was illegally allotted to defendant Nos. 1 to 3 inspite of the fact that these defendants were entitled to only one-fourth share in the land and that the defendants were trying to remove the mango trees.

(2.) The suit was resisted by defendant Nos. 1 to 3 on various grounds. On the pleadings of the parties several issues were framed. Except issue No. 5, all the issues were decided in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants and a decree for injunction, as prayed for, was granted in their favour. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, Mehar Singh and others, filed an appeal which was heard by the Additional District Judge, Ambala, who remanded the case after framing an additional issue, for further trial. The suit was again decreed after remand. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala. Still dissatisfied, the said defendants preferred R.S.A. No. 1721 of 1969, which was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide his judgment dated February 14, 1974, and the suit of the plaintiffs-appellants was dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. It is in these circumstances that the present appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been filed by the plaintiffs.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that there is no merit in this appeal.