NARINDER & ORS Vs. RAMESH CHAND & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs' suit for rendition of a decree, for permanent prohibitory injunction besides for rendition of a decree, for declaration, stood dismissed by the learned trial Court. In an appeal carried therefrom, before the learned First Appellate Court, by the plaintiffs/respondents herein, the latter Court allowed their appeal besides obviously reversed the trial Court's judgment and decree, hence, the instant appeal.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. It is pleaded by the plaintiffs that they are residents and Khewatdars of village Dhar, Pargana Nawan Nagar, Tehsil, Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. Late Shri Asha Ram son of Jiwanu was having 1/7th share in total land measuring 7 bighas 7 biswas, comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No.5/5, bearing khasra Nos. 4, 11, 42, 86, 97 and 103, situated at village Panseta Hadbast No.272, Pargana Nawan Nagar, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. Similary he had also 1/6 share in total land measuring 34 bighas, 16 biswas, comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No.9/12, bearing Khasra Nos. 10, 44, 66, 69, 81, 133, 160, 162, 257, 263, 289, 298, 308, 335, 340, 355, 376 and 433 kita 18 situated at Village Dhr, Hadbast No.274, Pargana Nawn Nagar, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. Further that he was also having 1/6 share in total land measuring 46 bighas 1 biswas, comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No.10/13, bearing khasra No.3, 25, 48, 132, 150, 163, 354, 361 kita 8, situated at village Dhr. Hadbast No.274, Pargana Nawan Nagar, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. The Proforma defendants No.7 and 8 are not available at the time of filing the suit, therefore, they have been arrayed as proforma defendants. The plaintiffs have also no adverse interest qua the proforma defendants No.4 to 13 and they being co-sharers of suit land have also been made proforma defendants. It is further pleaded that one Shri Jiwanu, the common ancestor of the parties had eight sons and two daughters and disputed property was once owned and possessed by said Jiwanu during his life time. It is averred that Asa Ram, the predecessor-in- interest of defendants No.1 to 3 being son of late Jiwanu was given in adoption to one Shri Ram Lal, son of Shri Tilak Raj, resident of village Gusana, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar, when he was about 14 years old because late Ram Lal son of Shri Tilak Raj was issueless, who was serving in the Indian Railway at Kalka. Lateron late Shri Asha Ram was also employed in the Indian Railway and retired as Khalasi on 30.6.1982 from Railway Service at Kalka and he settled at Kalka with his family members defendants No.1 to 3. Deceased Asa Ram had severed his ties from the family of his natural father Shri Jiwanu after said adoption which took place in the year 1938.

(3.) The suit was contested by defendants No.1 to 3 only and they have filed written statement, wherein, they have taken preliminary objections of maintainability, estoppel, limitation etc. On merits, it is asserted by them that late Sh. Asa Ram always treated as son by his natural father Sh. Jiwanu and the plaintiffs had earlier filed Civil Suit No.323/1 of 1996, titled as Bhag Singh and others vs. Asa Ram etc., in which late Asa Ram was admitted as son of late Jiwanu. Therefore, the plaintiffs are estopped to deny the status of late Sh. Asa Ram.