RAM CHANDER Vs. GOBIND RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUIT of the plaintiff-appellant for declaration and injunction to restrain defendant-respondent Nos. 1 to 4, from raising any type of construction over the suit land mentioned in the site plan attached with the plaint has been dismissed by the Courts below. The Courts below have arrived at a definite finding that the plaintiff- appellant has been using part of the joint land as his residence and he himself is in possession of two rooms constructed on the rear portion of the property, as such, has got no right to restrain the defendants-respondents from raising construction over the front portion of the suit land. Courts below have taken into consideration the portion of the joint land in possession of the plaintiff and applying the principle of estoppel that he himself has raised construction on the joint land would not permit him to restrain the defendantsrespondents from exercising the same right. The possession of the defendants-respondents on part of the property is also apparent from the judgments passed by the Courts below.

(2.) THE subject matter is covered by the ratio of the judgment in case Bachan Singh v. Swaran Singh, (2000-3), The Punjab Law Reporter, Page-416, wherein the following principles have been laid down on the basis of the consideration of various judicial pronouncements pertaining to the right of co-owner to raise construction :-