MOHAN LAL Vs. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF -Respondent Balbir Singh filed a suit, claiming that he had a right to irrigate his land bearing Khasra Nos. 66 and 67, through water of three sources, existing on another piece of land and that the present Petitioner and proforma -Respondents, who were impleaded as Defendants, had no right, title or interest in the said water and, hence, they were liable to be restrained by permanent prohibitory injunction, from utilizing the water to irrigate their land.

(2.) SUIT was contested by the Defendants. Trial Court, after framing issues and recording evidence, held that the identity of the site/land, on which the three water sources existed, had not been established. Trial Court observed that though evidence had been led to show that water sources existed on Khasra No. 133/109, no such description had been given in the plaint. Consequently, the suit was dismissed.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record.