LES RAJ Vs. DALIP DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant, who aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned first Appellate Court has filed the instant appeal. (The parties hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff' and the 'defendants').

(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit (i.e. Civil Suit No. 67 of 2017) before the learned trial Court for permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction on the ground that the parties Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?Yes to the suit were joint owners in possession of the suit land and defendant No. 1 had purchased a portion of the suit land and a .house situated over it from one of the co-owners Shri Thakru alias Thakur Dass vide sale deed No. 363 dtd. 17/7/2008. It was averred that the plaintiff had earlier filed a civil suit No. 66 of 2009 before the learned trial Court, which was withdrawn by him in Civil Appeal No. 64 of 2011 with the permission to file a new suit on the same cause of action. The permission to withdraw the suit was granted to the plaintiff by the learned District Judge, Kullu vide order dtd. 3/5/2012. It was alleged that the defendants were trying to encroach upon the valuable portion of the suit land and were trying to raise construction forcibly over some portion of the suit land without getting the same and the house partitioned. It was also alleged that the defendants had raised upper storey of the building and had stacked stones over the vacant portion of the suit land during the pendency of the suit and prayed for restraining the defendants from encroaching upon the valuable portion of the land comprised in Khasra No. 902 and 908, khata/khatauni No. 20/27, measuring 0/1/62 hectares situated in Up Muhal Manali, Kothi Manali, Tehsil Manali, District Kullu, H.P. and to demolish the construction raised by them over the suit land and further for directions to remove the stones stacked by the defendants over the vacant portion of the suit land.

(3.) The defendants resisted and contested the suit by filing written statement and had taken the preliminary objections qua maintainability, locus standi, cause of action, suppression of material facts, non-joinder of necessary parties and res-judicata.