JARAM SINGH Vs. SANTOSH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether in absence of any relief for declaration can a suit for injunction be maintained? is a moot question that falls for consideration. However, before answering this question, brief facts need to be noticed.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a civil suit for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction against the defendants on the ground that he is owner in possession of the land comprised in Khata Khatauni No.6/6, Khasra No. 385, measuring 13-00-00 bighas, situated in Mohal Pukhri, Pargna Chuhan, Tehsil Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P. It was pleaded that defendant No.1 is also owner of Khasra Nos. 381 and 395, Khata Khatauni No. 79/94, measuring 01-01-00 bighas, situated in the same Mohal. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff has constructed a house over Khasra No. 385 for last more than 25 years and it was also alleged that there is a passage which starts from CBA Pathankot PWD road and goes through Khasra No. 380, 381 and upto Khasra No. 385. It was also pleaded that the said path is in existence for more than 25 years and the plaintiff is using the same and as such, the plaintiff claimed that he has acquired the right of easement by way of necessity and prescription as there is no other alternative path. It was further averred that on 21.6.2010 the defendants forcibly started digging the suit land for raising the construction and they also threatened to demolish the path. The plaintiff requested them not to do so, but they were adamant for the said illegal act and as such, the plaintiff prayed that the suit may be decreed for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction.

(3.) The defendants contested the suit by filing written statement, wherein preliminary objections qua maintainability, locus standi and cause of action were raised. On merits, it was denied that the plaintiff constructed the house about 25 years back and it was alleged that the plaintiff purchased the land on 21.6.1991 and they are raising the construction on their own land. They further alleged that there is already another alternative path exist on the spot and denied the passage/path over the suit land.