LAWS(HPH)-2011-8-136

GURPAL SINGH Vs. CHAMAN LAL

Decided On August 12, 2011
GURPAL SINGH Appellant
V/S
CHAMAN LAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.8.2001 rendered by the learned District Judge, Una in Civil Appeal No.82 of 1996.

(2.) Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondents - plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as ˜plaintiffs for convenience sake) instituted a suit for vacant possession of land measuring 0 -00 -45 hectares marked by letters A, B, C and D shown in the red colour in the site plan by removing super structure comprised in Khewat No. 20 min, Khatauni No. 101 and present Khasra No.527 per Missal Haquiat Settlement for the year 1986 -87 situate in village Kuneran, Tehsil Amb, District Una by stating that the plaintiffs were owners, however, appellant -defendant (hereinafter referred to as ˜defendant for convenience sake) in the month of June, 1985, allegedly encroached upon the aforesaid land marked by letters A, B, C and D at the back of the plaintiffs when they were out of the village and raised construction by taking undue advantage of the absence of the plaintiffs. The defendant was requested to remove the super structure and to hand over the vacant possession of the suit land marked by letters A, B, C and D to the plaintiff but to no avail. Thereafter, settlement proceedings started in the village and it was mutually agreed between the parties before Tehsildar, Settlement that the defendant would give two marlas of land in lieu of the suit land to the plaintiffs and in that eventuality, the plaintiffs would relinquish their claim over the suit land. The understanding was not given effect to. It is in these circumstances the suit was filed for possession of the suit land by removing super ­structure.

(3.) Defendant contested the suit by filing written statement. On merits, he has alleged that he has raised Abadi in the suit land for the last more than 12 years in the presence of plaintiffs. The raising of the construction was not objected to by the plaintiffs. He has spent a sum of ! 60,000/ - for raising the construction. An application was filed before the Tehsildar, Settlement wherein during inquiry, defendant was found in possession by way of Abadi and cultivation and the entries were accordingly corrected in the record of rights. Thereafter, the plaintiffs agreed and requested the Tehsildar that they would not claim anything over the land underneath the construction, if remaining land which is under cultivation, is handed over to them. In view of that compromise, remaining land was handed over by the defendant to the plaintiffs. The allegation that the defendant had agreed to give 2 marlas of land in lieu of the suit land was stated to be wrong. The plea of adverse possession was also taken. The plaintiffs filed replication. Issues were framed by the trial court on 8.9.1992. Trial Court decreed the suit for possession on 21.6.1996 for possession of land measuring 0 -00 -45 hectares marked by letters A, B, C and D shown in red colour in site plan by removing super structure shown in Ex.PW -1/A comprised of Khewat No.20 min, Khatauni No. 101 and present Khasra No.527 per Missal Haquiat Settlement for the year 1986 -87 situate in village Kuneran, Tehsil Amb, District Una with costs. Defendant preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Una. He dismissed the same on 9.8.2001. Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal. It was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: