MAST RAM (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS Vs. SUBHASH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having regard to the nature of order this court proposes to pass, after having carefully perusing impugned judgment and decree, passed by learned first appellate Court vis-à-vis pleadings adduced on record, by the appellants, it may not be necessary to give facts and circumstances of the case, save and except that the respondent-plaintiff, filed a suit for declaration to the effect that suit land is owned and possessed by him and defendant has no right, title or interest over the suit land. Plaintiff, by way of suit referred to above, prayed for injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in the suit land and, in the alternative, for possession in case, defendant succeeds in taking possession of suit land or if otherwise found in possession of suit land.

(2.) Aforesaid suit having been filed by the plaintiff came to be decreed, whereby he was held to be owner in possession of the suit land. Learned trial Court, while holding plaintiff to be owner-in-possession of the suit land also held that defendant has no right, title or interest over the suit land. Entries in favour of defendant are wrong, illegal, hence set aside. Defendant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment and decree, preferred an appeal under Section 96 CPC, before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Una, District Una, which came to be registered as CA No. 21/98 RBT No. 80/04/98. However, the fact remains that the aforesaid appeal was dismissed, as a result of which, judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, appellants have approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, praying therein for setting aside the judgments and decrees passed by learned Courts below.

(3.) Appeal at hand was admitted on 8.7.2005, on the following substantial questions of law: