(1.) Both the learned Courts below have dismissed the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Sec. 151 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC in short) moved by the plaintiff, giving cause of action to him to seek intervention of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) Petitioner was the plaintiff before the learned Trial Court. He moved an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for restraining the respondents-defendants from raising construction or changing the nature of the suit land comprised in Khata Khatauni Nos. 28/54, 28/55, 28/56 and Khasra Nos. 1978, 1979, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1986 and 1987, Kita 9, measuring 591-00 Sq. mtrs. situated at Mohal Pungh/26/7, Tehsil Sunderngar District Mandi, H.P. Plaintiff's case was that he was recorded as owner in possession of the suit land. Defendants (respondents herein) were co-owners over the adjoining land comprised in Khasra Nos. 1996 to 1998 measuring 482-00 sq. mtrs. situated in Mohal Pungh/26/7, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. Plaintiff claimed that in the old settlement record, area of suit land was depicted to be 27 karam i.e. 38 meters. However, during settlement operations held during the years 1967-1977, he was given 13 karam i.e. 19 meters on the road side front. Mutation Nos. 1843 and 1934 were accordingly entered and attested. Grievance of the plaintiff was that area of the plaintiff's land had been wrongly reduced, whereas, area of the land of the defendants had been incorrectly increased by 10 meters more than the actual land purchased by them vide mutation No. 1635.
(3.) Defendants contested the application. Their stand was that neither they had any concern over the suit land nor were they interfering with the same. They pleaded that the plaintiff had covered the entire suit land by a boundary wall. There was another land parcel between the suit land and that of the defendants' land. The said land parcel comprised in Khasra No.1988 measuring 68 mtrs. belongs to one Joginder Singh