HAKAM CHAND Vs. TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 7.5.2013 rendered by the District Judge, Solan in Civil Appeal No. 26 -NL/13 of 2012.

(2.) PERTINENT facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that respondent -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "plaintiff" for convenience sake) filed suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the appellants -defendants (hereinafter referred to as "defendants" for convenience sake). Plaintiff -company was incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act. It has registered office at Torrent House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Plaintiff being owner in possession of the suit land measuring 1 bigha 16 biswas bearing khasra Nos. 1448/1235 as comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 252/265, land measuring 6 bighas 13 biswas bearing Khasra Nos. 1449/1235(2 -6) and 1452/1235(4 -7) as comprised in Khata Khatauni Nos. 248/261, land measuring 5 bighas 6 biswas, bearing Khasra No. 1450/1235 as comprised in Khata Khatauni Nos. 250/263, land measuring 3 bighas 16 biswas bearing Khasra Nos. 1435/1235(2 -10) as comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 249/262, land measuring 5 bighas 6 biswas bearing khasra No. 1454/1235 as comprised in Khata Khatauni Nos. 251/264 pertaining to and situated in the area of village Bhud, Hadbast No. 188, Pargana Dharampur, Tehsil Baddi, District Solan, H.P., had raised a factory building covered by a boundary wall for manufacturing pharmaceutical products. It started functioning in the year 2005. Defendant Nos. 1 to 7 are co -owners of land measuring 5 bighas 17 biswas, bearing Khasra No. 1239 and land measuring 1 bigha 7 biswas, bearing Khasra No. 1240 as comprised in Khata Khatauni Nos. 129/136 and 255/268, respectively as detailed in the jamabandi for the year 1998 -99. Defendant Nos. 1 to 7 are co -owners of adjoining land measuring 7 bighas 4 biswas and have given their land on contract to defendant No. 8 Gurbachan Singh for excavating and lifting earth from the above said land. The boundary wall has collapsed due to excavation carried by defendant Gurbachan Singh at the instance of other defendants.

(3.) REPLICATION was filed by the plaintiff. Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) framed issues on 5.10.2009. Suit of the plaintiff was decreed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) on 20.9.2012. Defendants were permanently restrained from interfering, dispossessing or causing any damage to the boundary wall and factory building of the plaintiff situated over the suit land by excavating and lifting soil from their land near and to the root of the boundary wall of the plaintiff company. Defendants feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.9.2012 preferred an appeal before the District Judge, Solan. He dismissed the same on 7.5.2013. Hence, the present appeal.