STATE OF J&K Vs. GH RASOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Second Appeal is directed against the decree of Additional District Judge, Srinagar confirming on appeal the decree of Sub -Judge, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar, decreeing the respondents suit for prohibitory injunction restraining the appellants from interfering in their possession over some land and trees standing thereupon. The facts which have given rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as below:

(2.) THE respondents brought a suit on 29 -12 -1961 against the appellants alleging that they were in possession of land comprising Khasra Nos. 192 and 626 situated in village Gund Roshan, Tehsil Ganderbal and that the defendants were trying to interfere with their possession over the said land and taking steps to auction the trees standing on the land which had been according to the respondents planted by them. The defence taken up by the appellants was that land comprising Khasra No. 192 was a Khalsa land belonging to the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the trees standing on this land had also been planted by the Dehat Sudhar Department of the State over which the respondents did not have any claim. It was also pleaded in defence that the suit in its form was not maintainable against the appellants and the respondents had no cause of action to bring the suit against them. Appellant No. 2 herein raised a further plea that no notice as required under section 80 C. P. C. was served upon him and the suit against him was not maintainable on this score also. The trial court after perusing the pleadings of the parties framed the following issues: 1. Whether the land under survey Nos. 626 and 192 as described in para. No. 1 of the plaint situate in village Gund Roshan along with Willow and Kikar trees is in possession of the plaintiff? O.P.P. 2. If issue No. 1 is proved whether the defendants are un -authorisedly cutting the branches of the trees and intend to auction the trees? O.P.P. 3. WHETHER the plaintiffs suit is not maintainable? O.P.D.

(3.) The appellants challenged the judgment of the trial court in appeal before the Additional District Judge, Srinagar but with no success. The lower appellate court confirmed the findings arrived at by the trial court and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants. The appellants have now come up in second appeal against the judgment of the two courts below.