RAJPAL SINGH Vs. JAGDISH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 6.5.2005 rendered by the learned District Judge, Hamirpur in Civil Appeal No.95 of 2004.

(2.) "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff' for convenience sake) filed a suit for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction. According to the plaintiff, suit land of Khata No. 32 situated in Mouza Bani is jointly owned and possessed by the parties to suit. Appellant-defendant (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendant' for convenience sake) has constructed a house on the part of suit land comprised in Khasra Nos. 338 and 339 and Khasra No.340 is possessed by the plaintiff. There is a passage shown at points 'A' and 'B' with red ink in the site plan, which is being used by the plaintiff and his family members as ingress and outgress to his house situated in Khasra No. 340 passing through khasra Nos. 338 and 339. This is the only approach to the house of the plaintiff. Plaintiff, being co-owner, has every right to use the passage. However, defendant nine months back, placed rolling shutter/gate at points 'A' and 'B' and obstructed user of path by the plaintiff despite his objection. It is in these circumstances, the plaintiff filed the suit.

(3.) Suit was contested by the defendant. According to the written statement filed by the defendant, parties to suit are recorded as joint owners in possession in revenue record but they are in separate and exclusive possession over their shares of land by mutual agreement. The site plan submitted by the plaintiff was incorrect. There was no path over the suit land. The house of the defendant alongwith boundary wall and gate/rolling shutter were in existence for the last more than 20 years. The plaintiff has no right to disturb the possession of the defendant. The matter was resolved by the local Gram Panchayat.