SHANKAR & OTHERS Vs. PARKASH KAUR & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.03.2006, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Una, District Una, in Civil Appeal No.77/2002, reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.08.2002, passed by learned Sub Judge Ist Class-(II), Una, H.P., whereby suit of the plaintiff was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case, as emerged from the record, are that Shri Sarwan Singh, the predecessor-ininterest of the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the "plaintiff") averred that he is owner in possession of the land measuring 3 Kanals 10 Marlas bearing Khewat No. 929 min, Khatauni No.1633, Khasra No.3196 (old No.9216/3203/1, measuring 2 Kanals) and Khewat No.929 min, Khatauni No.1631, Khasra No.3197 (old No.9217/3203/2), as per Jamabandi for the year 1986-87, situated in village Haroli, Tehsil & District Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the "suit land") and has constructed his abadies and several shops over the same. It is averred by the plaintiff that he has leased one shop to defendant No.1 in Khasra No.3196 and the other shops are on lease with other persons. It is further averred that the defendants have started threatening to cause interference in the suit land and therefore, the plaintiff has prayed for grant of injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the suit land or dispossessing the plaintiff and in the alternative suit for possession in case the plaintiff is dispossessed by the defendants during the pendency of the suit. In the aforesaid background, the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendants.

(3.) Defendants, by way of detailed written statement, refuted the aforesaid claim having been put forth on behalf of the plaintiff and has taken the preliminary objections of maintainability, bar under section 57 of the H.P. Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1971. On merits, the defendants have alleged that they have no concern with Khasra No.3197. It is averred by the defendants that defendant No.1 is coming in possession of the land measuring 2 Kanalas comprised of Khasra No.9216/3203min as a tenant on payment of 'Chakota' since long time and has also constructed his abadies over this land, which abuts the main Una-Haroli road and is valuable piece of land. It is further averred that defendant No.1 has also built four shops over this land and one of his son Lekh Raj is running a maniari shop and the remaining area is being used as Bartan and the plaintiff has no concern with this land and shop of the defendant No.1. It is also averred by the defendants that the land comprising of Khasra No.9216/3203/1 min has been shown as "Kharkana" since 1973 to 1986 in the revenue papers. It is the claim of the defendants that the plaintiff has got prepared a false Jamabandi for the year 1986-87 from the consolidation staff showing the abadi whereas, Khasra Girdawari shows the land to be vacant. As per the defendants, the Tatima, got prepared by the plaintiff, in which the abadi has been shown, is also false. With the aforesaid submissions, the defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit of the plaintiff.