BIJE SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) Vs. BANWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that plaintiff Bije Singh had brought a suit for possession against defendants Banwari, Ram Singh, Devi Lal, Patwari, Mohinder Singh and Pat Ram impleading his brothers Balbir Singh and Sheo Singh as proforma defendants.

(2.) As per the case of the plaintiff, he along with his brothers Balbir Singh and Sheo Singh, proforma defendants No.6 and 7 had purchased plots No.574(1-0), 578 (1-2) and 579(1-2) total land measuring 3 kanals 4 marlas vide a registered sale deed No.1407 dated 22.10.1964; that they were delivered possession of the said plots and they remained in peaceful possession thereof. However, defendants No.1 and 2 illegally and unauthorizedly took possession of plot No.578 and 579 about seven years back and enclosed it by a boundary wall; that the plaintiff and proforma defendants had filed a Civil Suit No.505 of 1995, however it was dismissed; that the appeal preferred by them against the said judgment and decree also met with the same fate. Nevertheless the plaintiff and proforma defendants remained owners of the plot with which defendants No.1 to 5 have no concern; however defendants No.3 to 5 forged and fabricated the revenue record showing possession of defendants No.1 and 2 over those plots; that no notice of change of entries in the khasra girdawari was ever given to the plaintiff or proforma defendants, therefore the alleged change of khasra girdawari entries is illegal, null and void and without jurisdiction; that the plots in question can easily fetch an amount of Rs.500/- per month if given on rent to some person, the plaintiff claimed Rs.500/- as damages from 1.7.2001 to 31.7.2001. According to the plaintiff, the possession of defendants No.1 and 2 over these plots is as trespassers and they have no right in law and equity to remain in possession; that when the defendants refused to accept the claim of the plaintiff and to hand over possession of the suit land to him, feeling aggrieved, he brought the suit in question seeking possession by demolition of boundary wall and Kotha in plots No.578 and 579 and for grant of mesne profits from the date of suit till the date of eviction along with damages of Rs.500/- per month.

(3.) On notice, defendants No.1 to 3 had appeared and filed a joint written statement contesting the suit. Inter alia, they had raised preliminary objections that the suit was false, frivolous and vexatious; that no cause of action arose to the plaintiff to bring the suit; that the suit was not maintainable and was time barred; that the Court fee affixed on the plaint was insufficient; that the suit was bad on account of non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties; that the answering defendants had purchased the suit land from Smt.Chawli etc. vide sale deed dated 3.7.1979, who had purchased the same from one Bagrawat; that mutation of inheritance was sanctioned on 23.5.1972 and the answering defendants have been in possession thereof since 23.5.1972. On merits, the answering defendants had denied that the suit land had been purchased by the plaintiff and proforma defendants vide registered sale deed No.1407 dated 22.10.1964 or that the possession had been delivered to them at the spot. The answering defendants denied that their possession is unauthorized or as trespassers. According to them, khasra girdawari of the plot in dispute was wrongly continuing in the names of Aydan, Ram Chander and Krishan Lal; that before changing the khasra girdawari in favour of the answering defendants, a proper notice was served upon such persons, but since they had left the village long back, therefore the entries in the khasra girdawari were correctly changed in favour of the answering defendants and there was no necessity of serving any notice either to the plaintiff or proforma defendants in that matter. In the end, such defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit.