DES RAJ Vs. KISHAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiff's second appeal directed against the judgment and decree of the Courts below whereby suit for mandatory injunction for directing the defendant to vacate the premises, has been dismissed.

(2.) Plaintiff (appellant herein) filed suit against the brother Kishan Chand (respondent herein) alleging that he is owner of the house in dispute and defendant being his younger brother, was allowed to live in the house. Plaintiff averred that since he required the premises in dispute for his own use and occupation, license, in favour of the defendant was terminated but defendant failed to comply with the request of the plaintiff to vacate the premises. Hence the suit.

(3.) In answer to the claim of the plaintiff, defendant in his written statement, denied ownership of the plaintiff and submitted that he has become owner of the property by way of adverse possession as his possession is open, hostile, notorious, uninterrupted to the knowledge of the whole world including the plaintiff for the last more than 20 years. He denied that his possession is that of a licensee. He submitted that the house was purchased for Rs. 2500/- but no amount was paid by the plaintiff. Defendant alleged that their father paid the sale consideration but plaintiff being the eldest son, was given honour to get the sale deed executed in his favour. With regard to the construction of the house, defendant alleged that the house was constructed from out of joint funds of the parties including their father.