RESHMI DEVI Vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal has been preferred against the order dtd. 22/3/2021 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar in Civil Appeal No.02/2021 whereby the leave as prayed by the applicants/appellants to prefer an appeal against the judgment and decree dtd. 28/8/2019 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Padampur, Sri Ganganagar in Civil Original Suit No.47/2009 has been rejected. Vide the judgment and decree dtd. 28/8/2019, the suit for permanent injunction as filed by the plaintiff Virendra Kumar had been decreed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that a suit for permanent injunction was preferred by one Virendra Kumar against three defendants namely, Kashmir Singh, Binder Singh and Sheyopath Ram. The said suit was decreed in favour of Virendra Kumar restraining the defendants to interfere with the possession of the plaintiff and further to remove the gate of the room constructed by them opening towards the land of the plaintiff within a period of two months. Admittedly, in the said suit, Sheyopath Ram, defendant no.3 remained ex-parte.

(3.) The present application for leave to appeal has been filed by applicants Reshmi Devi and others being the mother, brother and sisters of Sheyopath Ram. It has been averred by the applicants that Virendra Kumar was very well aware of the fact that the applicants were in actual possession of the property in question but he intentionally did not implead them as party defendants in the suit and impleaded only Sheyopath Ram who was in fact not in possession of the property. It has further been submitted that Magna Ram, husband/ father of the present applicants had an agreement to sell in his favour executed by Devi Lal who was in possession of the property. By virtue of the said agreement to sell, the present applicants were in possession of the property and were attempted to be dispossessed by Virendra Kumar in garb of the judgment and decree dtd. 28/8/2019. The grant for leave to appeal against the judgment and decree dtd. 28/8/2019 was therefore, prayed for by the applicants. Vide the order impugned dtd. 22/3/2021, the said application as preferred by the applicants has been rejected against which the present second appeal has been preferred.