DALIP SINGH Vs. HARCHAND SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiffs' second appeal whose suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed by both the Courts below.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from taking forcible possession of the vacant site. According to the plaintiffs, the disputed property was jointly owned by them as Khewatdars and co-sharers of Shamlat Abadi. The site in dispute had been reserved by the plaintiffs for the common use of the villagers i.e., for use as playground for the school children, for parking vehicles on occasions like celebrations of marriages etc. It was also pleaded in the plaint that the defendants were threatening to raise construction by taking forcible possessions, which would affect the rights of the plaintiffs-appellants adversely.

(3.) The suit was contested on the plea that the disputed site was not joint property of the plaintiffs. It was further pleaded that the site in dispute had been in possession of Harchand Singh defendant continuously and peacefully without any interruption, as owner since the time of his fore-fathers. He had been using the disputed site for keeping Goharas, dung cakes, heaps of manure, tethering cattle and parking bullock carts etc. According to the further allegation of the defendants, previously there was a Kacha boundary wall, which had now been replaced by a pucca wall. Hence they claimed exclusive possession over the disputed property. It was specifically denied that the suit property was ever used by the plaintiffs or other co-villagers for any purpose.