JOG RAM Vs. RAJ KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this Regular Second Appeal, the appellant challenges the judgments and decrees passed by the learned Courts below, in terms whereof, the suit for declaration and injunction filed by the plaintiff was dismissed and so was the fate of the appeal.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are that appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the suit land was joint and un-partitioned and mutation Nos.11284, 11285, 11292 and 10604 got attested by defendants No.1 to 5 qua the suit land, part whereof was in possession of the plaintiff also in connivance with Revenue Officials behind the back of the plaintiff and without notice to him were null and void. Alternatively, a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining the defendants from changing the nature of the suit land and raising any construction there upon was also prayed for.

(3.) The stand of the defendants was that, though, the suit land was jointly owned by the parties and had not been legally partitioned, but, the parties were in separate possession of the respective shares in the suit land and none could be said to be in possession of the suit land as pleaded by the plaintiff without ascertaining the spot. It was also the stand of the defendants that the plaintiff had occupied the land in excess to his share and the mutation was rightly attested and sanctioned by the Revenue Authority as per the factual position. It was also the stand of the defendants that the suit was bad for mis-joinder of the parties. The plaintiff had agreed to hand over the possession of the land in excess to his share and to compensate for the same, but, he had failed to do so.