CHANDU RAM Vs. JAGAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.3.2009 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur in Civil Appeal No. 81 of 2001 RBT 63 of 2004.

(2.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the Respondent -Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'Plaintiff ' for convenience sake) filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction and in the alternative he has prayed for possession by way of demolition of the structure. According to the Plaintiff, the land comprised of Khata No. 182 min, Khatauni No. 436 min, Khasra No. 2646/1925 measuring 118 -10 square meters, according to the Jamabandi for the year 1991 -92 (hereafter referred to as 'suit land '), is owned and possessed by him. According to him, Appellant -Defendant (hereinafter referred as 'Defendant ' for convenience sake) was stranger to the suit land and has no right, title and interest over the same. According to the Plaintiff, Defendant was bent upon to dispossess him from the suit land. Defendant has been interfering with his possession. Cause of action, according to the Plaintiff, has arisen to him in the year 1995 when the Defendant started digging the suit land and collected construction material over the same. The suit was contested by the Defendant. According to the Defendant, he was the owner of the land adjacent to the suit land. He has claimed that he has obtained demarcation of his land. The demarcation was confirmed by AC -II Grade. The trial court framed issues on 20.2.1996. Suit filed by the Plaintiff was decreed by the learned Sub Judge 1st Class on 31.8.2001. Defendant was restrained from interfering or raising any construction over the suit land and decree for mandatory injunction was also passed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. Defendant was directed through mandatory injunction to demolish the construction raised by him over portion of the suit land comprising Khasra No. 2646/1925/1 as reflected in Aks Shazra Ex.PW -2/B at point 'JKL ' to the extent of 4 square meters and to handover the vacant possession of this land to the Plaintiff, within the period of three months. Defendant preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur. The Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal on 19.3.2009. Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal.

(3.) MR . Dalip K. Sharma has strenuously argued that both the courts below have not considered the well settled principles of law. According to him, both the courts below have erred in law by not placing reliance on documents Ex.PW -5/A, PW -5/B and PW -5/C. He has further argued that the judgments were not in accordance with order 20 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.