RAM AVTAR Vs. ISHWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rohtak as well as judgment and decree dtd. 28/2/2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak and consequential dismissal of their suit.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the case are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from asserting themselves as co-sharers in the suit land and interfering in the possession of the plaintiffs. It was further prayed that in case defendants are held to be in joint possession in view of the revenue entries a decree for exclusion of the defendants from their joint possession and vesting of their disputed 1/3rd share, recorded in the name of Hari Singh, be passed in favour of plaintiff No. 1 to the extent of half share and in favour of plaintiffs No. 2 to 8 to the extent of rest of the half share.

(3.) It was pleaded that the suit property belonged to Neki Ram son of Shiv Lal as karta of the Hindu undivided family comprising of Neki Ram and his three sons i.e. Hari Singh (father of defendants No. 1 to 4), Sat Narain (father of plaintiff no. 1), and Same Ram (father of plaintiffs No. 2 to 7 and husband of plaintiff No. 8). It is averred in the plaint that maternal grandfather of Hari Singh, Sat Narain and Same Ram, namely Gokal son of Udmi, had no son. Therefore, he adopted Hari Singh with the consent of Neki Ram and his wife Smt. Dakhan. Adoption deed dtd. 28/4/1943 was executed and registered on 1/5/1943. Therefore, after his adoption, Hari Singh had no concern with the property of his natural father Neki Ram as he had succeeded to the estate left by his adopted father Gokal. Furthermore, Sat Narain and Hari Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs, were claimed to be in cultivating possession of the suit property even during the time of Neki Ram. After Neki Ram 's death, Sat Narain and Hari Singh continued to be in exclusive possession of the suit property and thereafter the plaintiffs claimed to be in possession of the suit property. Mutation of inheritance of Neki Ram was, however, wrongly sanctioned in favour of Sat Narain, Same Ram and Hari Singh in equal shares i.e. 1/3rd share each. Revenue entries continued in the joint names of all the three. The defendants started interfering in the possession of the plaintiffs on the basis of revenue entries. They did not desist despite request. Hence, the suit was filed.