PURAN Vs. BIHARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment and decree rendered on 23.9.2002 in Civil Appeal No. 134 -N/XIII/2000 by the learned District Judge, Kangra, whereby, the learned First Appellate Court allowed the appeal preferred by the plaintiff/respondent. The effect thereof, is, that the decree for compensation qua the suit property accorded in favour of the plaintiff/respondent was modified by the learned First Appellate Court, with, a decree for vacant possession of the suit property, in, favour the plaintiff/respondent.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff has filed a suit for vacant possession of the land comprised in khata No. 59 min, Khatauni No. 177, Khasra No. 406, 407, 408, plots -3, measuring 0 -03 -60 HM, situated in Mohal Kandi, Mauza Bhungara, Tehsil Nurpor, District Kangra, H.P. on the averment that he is co -sharer of the suit land and he never gave the possession of the suit land to the defendant for any purpose nor the defendant was inducted as tenant by the owners. The possession of the defendant over the suit land is stated to be without any legal status since the year 1982. The defendant being a forceful person, has during the settlement operation in the month of November, 1982, in connivance and at the back of the plaintiff taken over the possession of the suit land and raised a temporary structure thereon. When the defendant was asked by the plaintiff to handover the vacant possession of the suit land, as also, to remove the debris of structure from the suit land, the defendant assured the plaintiff to hand over the vacant possession of the suit, if, after due demarcation, it is found to be in his illegal and unauthorized possession. On being measured by the settlement officials, the suit land was found to be owned by the plaintiff along with other co -sharers and the defendant was found to be in unauthorized possession of the same. Hence the suit.

(3.) THE plaintiff filed replication to the written statement of the defendant, wherein, he denied the contents of the written statement and re -affirmed and re -asserted the averments made in the plaint.