PURAN CHAND Vs. PHOOL PATI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 11 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. RSA-9916-2018

(2.) The appellant/plaintiff has come up in appeal against the judgments of the trial Court dated 10.10.2014 and lower appellate Court dated 30.05.2018 whereby his suit for recovery of possession of plot measuring 5 marlas i.e. 148 square yards comprising in khasra No. 1198 as per the details given in the head note of the plaint, has been dismissed by both the Courts.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff was that he is owner of khasra No. 1198 which was earlier owned by Sadhu Ram, real uncle of plaintiff who expired issueless and plaintiff and defendant No. 2 being his legal heirs became owners in possession of the suit land. He further asserted that by mutual partition dated 10.01.2005, plaintiff became exclusive owner of the suit land. There was a boundary wall and one room at the suit land which was used by the plaintiff. Manphool and his son were trying to dispossess the plaintiff. In this backdrop suit for permanent injunction was filed on 21.07.2006 but after filing of that suit, on 23.07.2006, defendants demolished his room and raised their construction. Plaintiff moved an application dated 25.07.2006 to appoint local commissioner and thereafter the suit was amended to claim relief of mandatory injunction as well. That civil suit No. 431 of 05.08.2009 was dismissed on 10.02.2011 with liberty to file a fresh suit for recovery of possession. In this backdrop, the present suit was filed.