RADHEY SHYAM & ANR Vs. RAMESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil second appeal preferred by appellantdefendants Radhey Shyam and Ram Niwas is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.07.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Deedwana in Civil Appeal No.8/2009, whereby the learned first appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-defendants and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Deedwana in Civil Original Suit No.43/2009 (32/2005), whereby the learned trial court decreed the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondentplaintiff filed a suit against the appellant-defendants before the learned trial court stating inter alia that the plaintiff is having a residential house at Salt Road, Namak Mandi, Deedwana and in the north side of the house there is public road while in the south side there is house of defendant Radhey Shyam and in the east there is house of Vimla Devi. It was further averred in the plaint that the plaintiff constructed a wall of about 15-20 ft. from south to east by incurring expenses and the wall is constructed after leaving one feet land in the side of the defendant, therefore, the plaintiff can use and occupy the said wall and no other person is entitled to use it. It was also averred that the defendants, who are the neighbours in the south of wall, started construction and used the wall of the plaintiff raising construction over it, therefore, the plaintiff demolished the encroachment, on which the family members of the defendants annoyed and started abusing him. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for restraining the defendants from raising construction over the wall in question.

(3.) The defendants filed written statement stating that the map which was produced by the plaintiff is not proper and he has not mentioned the measurement of the chowk. It is further averred that the defendants have the right to use the wall in question, therefore, the suit for permanent injunction may be dismissed.