SHRI GOBIND SINGH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the second appeal of the plaintiff (represented by his LRs), in a suit for possession that he had filed against respondents No.1 to 4 herein (described in the judgment of the Courts below as defendant set No.1 and hereinafter to be referred to as the defendants), seeking possession of a "Gair Mumkin Bara", measuring 16 marlas, described in detail in the plaint filed by the present appellants-plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to only as the plaintiffs).

(2.) The facts of the case, as taken from the judgment of the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narwana, are that the claim of the plaintiffs was that he was the owner of the aforesaid 'bara', in possession thereof, till about two years prior to the filing of the suit (on 05.08.2006). The defendants allegedly illegally encroached upon the "bara"/"gher" and constructed their residential house on it and despite the request of the plaintiffs, they did not vacate the same, leading to the filing of the suit. It was further, naturally, contended that defendants No.1 to 4 had no right, title or interest in the suit property because the lawful owners thereof were actually the plaintiff and defendants No.5 to 17 (referred to in the judgments of the Courts below as defendants set No.2.)

(3.) Upon notice issued to them, the defendants appeared and filed a written statement, stating that actually it was the plaintiffs who had no legal right to the suit property which was in possession of the defendants & their ancestors since long and that they were, in fact, in open and hostile possession thereof since the time of their fore-fathers, without payment of any rent. It was further stated that actually the father of the defendants had also purchased the property from the daughters of one Ramji Lal, before consolidation of holdings, by way of an oral agreement, but the revenue entries were not corrected 'properly' in their names.