PAWAN KUMAR Vs. NEERAJ KUMAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Looking to the nature of order, I propose to pass, it is not at all necessary to go into the relative merits of the case, save and except, to observe that the defendant is the appellant, who aggrieved by the judgments and decrees passed by both the learned Courts below, has filed the instant appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit for possession and the same was decreed by holding her entitled to a decree of possession on the basis of her title of land comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 604min/886min, Khasra no.965, measuring 94.34 Sq. Mtrs, situated in Mauza Up Sampada Devi Nagar, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. and the plaintiff was further held entitled for the possession of the suit land comprised in Khasra No. 965/1 to the extent of 52.20 Sq. Mtrs, more specifically shown in Tatima Tafawat prepared by the Demarcating Officer and placed on record with the demarcation report dated 01.08.2014 having admitted in evidence situated in Mauza Up Sampada Devi Nagar, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P.

(3.) The appeal filed by the defendant against the aforesaid judgment and decree came to be modified by the learned first appellate Court to the extent that the plaintiff was held entitled to possession on the basis of title of the suit land comprised in Khata Khatauni No.604min/886min, Khasra No. 965/1, measuring 52.20 Sq. Metres only and the demarcation report dated 01.8.2014 and the tatima showing encroachment in Khasra No.965/1 to the extent of 52.20 Sq. Metres was ordered to form part of the decree.