LADHA SINGH Vs. KANHAYA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two connected defendant's Regular Second Appeal Nos. 1056 and 1057 of 1964 arising out of the same judgment passed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, on 31st July, 1964, whereby he modifying the decree and judgment of the trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff in toto, with costs throughout. The facts are not much in dispute and may be stated in a narrow compass. There was one house No. B X 526 situate on Rehmat Ullah Road, Ludhiana, which belonged to a Muslim. After partition of the country, it was declared an evacuee property and divided by the Rehabilitation Department into three portions which were allotted to Kanhaya Lal plaintiff, Ladha Singh defendant and one Mehar Chand. The portion allotted to the plaintiff was P.X 526/3 and that to the defendant B.X. 526/2. These portions have been marked in different colours in the plan exhibit P.1 filed by the plaintiff in this suit. The case of the plaintiff is that the portion allotted to him was transferred to him permanently by the Rehabilitation Department by a registered conveyance deed Exhibit P. 4 dated 30th September, 1961, and, according to this conveyance deed, he was also entitled to the portion marked red in the plan Exhibit P. 1 and also the Deorhi. The allegation is that the defendant had taken wrongful possession of a portion of the courtyard measuring 20'x8' shown in red colour in Exhibit P. 1 and that he had stocked his bricks there in order to construct a wall. The plaintiff has further pleaded that the defendant be restrained from not only using the courtyard and putting up any construction thereon but also from the use of the Deorhi.

(2.) The defendant appellant raised certain preliminary objections as to court-fee and jurisdiction and also pleaded that Mehar Chand was a necessary party. On merits it was pleaded by the defendant that he was in fact the owner of the entire portion including the portion marked red about which a dispute had been raised. He also claimed that he had a right to use Deorhi for his passage and to pass a Nali through the courtyard. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were struck :-

(3.) Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the house shown read and green in the plan attached ?