DARSHAN SINGH Vs. DALIP KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ditta was allotted plot measuring 3 kanals 8 marlas by the Rehabilitation Department. Ultimately Sanad Exhibit P-10 was granted to him. By will he gave the same to Balkar Singh, Hazara Singh and Sardara Singh. Ultimately, it came to Balkar Singh. On the death of Balkar Singh, it was inherited by his widow Smt. Dalip Kaur, son and two daughters. Darshan Singh and his two brothers tried to interfere in their possession and hence, they filed suit for injunction and in the alternative for possession. Hazara Singh and Sardara Singh were also made defendants. The first three defendants contested the suit and pleaded ownership by adverse possession.

(2.) The trial Court on appreciation of evidence came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are owners, but held that since they were not in possession the suit for injunction was not maintainable. On plaintiffs' appeal, the lower Appellate Court, on appreciation of evidence came to the conclusion that they were proved to be owners and since they had pleaded in the alternative for a decree of possession and granted a decree of possession. It is second appeal by Darshan Singh, one of the defendants.

(3.) After hearing the counsel for the parties and on consideration of the matter, I am of the view that there is no scope for interference in the second appeal. The plaintiff's title is clearly proved from the Sanad and other material brought on the record and the defendant-appellant has not been able to prove his adverse possession. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed, leading the parties to bear their own costs.