LAWS(HPH)-2017-4-122

BAKSHI RAM Vs. TAJDIN

Decided On April 26, 2017
BAKSHI RAM Appellant
V/S
Tajdin Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present appeal, the appellant/defendant has challenged the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned Presiding Officer/Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur in Civil Appeal No. 138 of 2000 titled Bakshi Ram Vs. Tajdin as well as in Civil Appeal No. 137 of 2000 titled Tajdin Vs. Bakshi Ram dated 3.3.2007 vide which learned appellate court while dismissing the appeals so filed both by present appellant as well as present respondent upheld the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned Sub Judge-II, Hamirpur in Civil Suit No. 61 of 1995 dated 30.6.2000 whereby learned the trial court decreed the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff for permanent prohibitory injunction.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present case are that respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction on the ground that land comprising khata No. 148min, khatauni No. 190, khasra No. 1251/708 measuring 0K-14 Marlas as per jamabandi for the year 1991-92 situated in Tika Paplah, Mauza Mewa, Tehsil Bhoranj, District Hamirpur was in possession of the plaintiff since last many years and that defendant was total stranger qua the suit land and he had no right, title or interest over the same. As per the plaintiff, defendant had his land adjoining to the suit land and he was trying to encroach upon the suit land by digging the same for the purpose of raising construction. According to the plaintiff, defendant had collected material over the suit land since last one week and was openly proclaiming that he would encroach upon the suit land by raising construction over it forcibly, to which he had no right to do so.

(3.) By way of written statement defendant disputed the claim of the plaintiff. According to the defendant it was the plaintiff who was a total stranger qua the suit land and in fact the suit land was in the possession of the defendant from the time of his ancestors and he had become owner in possession of the same by afflux of time.