BEENA & ORS Vs. PARBHAT BHUSHAN & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant have challenged the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Chamba, in Civil Appeal No. 46 of 2002 dated 12.01.2004, vide which learned Appellate Court while accepting the appeal filed by the present respondents, has set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned Senior Sub Judge, Chamba, in Civil Suit No. 59 of 1997 dated 13.05.2002, whereby learned trial Court had decreed the suit of the plaintiffs for possession qua the suit property i.e. room situated on Khasra No. 560/1.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present case are that the appellants/plaintiffs, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs, filed a suit for possession and for mandatory injunction, inter alia, on the ground that they were owners in possession of the suit property i.e. room in the ground floor, situated over Khasra No. 560/1, Khata Khatauni No. 938/1226, Mohalla Ramgarh Chamba Town, as per jamabandi for the year 1990-91. The case of the plaintiffs was that at one stage they and defendants were co-sharers but subsequently property was partitioned between the parties through a decree of the Civil Court which was passed in Civil Suit No. 172 decided on 07.06.1977 by the Court of learned Sub Judge, Chamba and after passing of the said decree, possession of the suit property was also obtained by the plaintiffs to the extent of their share. It was further the case of the plaintiffs that one room in the ground floor situated over Khasra No. 560/1 was handed over to the defendants on the undertaking that they would vacate the same as and when required by the plaintiffs. However, according to the plaintiffs, defendants had forcibly blocked the stair-case and were not allowing the plaintiffs to use the same. On this ground, plaintiffs filed the present suit for possession of room in the ground floor comprising Khasra No. 560/1 and restraining the defendants from blocking the entrance of stair-case to the plaintiffs.

(3.) The claim so put forth by the plaintiffs was contested by the defendants, who in their written statement took the stand that defendants were granted possession of one room in the ground floor and one room in the on the first floor comprised in Khasra No. 560/2 in the course of partition which took place between the parties and that defendants were in possession of the said room/property and no room comprised in Khasra No. 560/1 was in their possession as was alleged by the plaintiffs. It was further the case of the defendants that the room which was in the first floor over Khasra No. 560/2 was in possession of the plaintiffs who were supposed to hand over the same to the defendants.