ISHWAR DAS Vs. LACHHMAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants appeal against the judgment and decree dated 8.1.1996 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, who allowed the appeal of the plaintiff and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 11.1.1999 and remanded the suit with the directions to the trial Court to deal with the issues on merit and give a specific findings on each and every issue.

(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner:-

(3.) Lachhman Dass, plaintiff and Chander Parkash defendant No. 2 were pleaded to be the owners in possession of the residential house marked by letters ABCHGFED bearing No.EP-4 measuring 504 sq. yds. shown in green colour and red colour in the site plan attached with the plaint and situated in Mohalla Pathanwara, Sohana, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. According to the plaintiff, the said house was allotted to the uncle of the plaintiff and defendant No .2 by the Rehabilitation Department, which was later on got registered by them in favour of Jetha Nand in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Gurgaon. Jetha Nand, uncle of the plaintiff, transferred the house in question to the plaintiff and defendant No. 2 and later on the said house was partitioned between the plaintiff and defendant No .2 in the year 1984 by way of family settlement and since then the plaintiff has become the owner in possession of the house marked by letters EFGH, including the red portion marked by letters EFGH, while the defendant No. 2 is owner in possession of the portion of the house No.EP-4 marked by letters ADEN in the site plan attached with plaint. The red portion marked by letters FEGH is part of and parcel of the house marked by letter ABCHGRRD to the positive knowledge of defendant No. 1. The plaintiff had got constructed his house after getting the site plan approved from the Municipal Committee, Sohana, and has left uncovered and unbuilt the area shown in red colour marked by letters EFGH. The defendant No. 1 is in possession of house No.EP-3 owned by Verran Bai measuring 106 sq. yds., claiming himself to be an heir of said Veeran Bai. The defendant No. 1 has got no concern with the portion marked by letters EFGH in the site plan in any manner. No door of the house of defendant No. 1 opens towards the said red portion nor there is any other opening of his house towards the said land of the plaintiff. Defendant No. 1 never used the said land shown in the red colour, which has been used by the plaintiff as part and parcel of his house. The plaintiff apprehends an illegal encroachment on the red portion by the defendant No. 1, thus, the plaintiff prayed for a decree for declaration that the plaintiff is owner in possession of house No. EP-4 marked by letters BCEM in the site plan attached with plaint shown in red colour and further sought a relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant No. 1 from opening any door of his house or raising any kind of appurtures on the suit land or causing any obstruction in the house of the same by the plaintiff.