PURAN RAM Vs. NAGAR PALIKA, NOHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal under Section 100 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.03.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Nohar, whereby, the judgment and decree dated 25.08.2008 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nohar, District ­ Hanumangarh has been upheld.

(2.) THE facts in brief may be noticed thus: the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondent, inter alia, with the averments that the appellant was in possession over plot No.336 situated at Sector No.5, Nohar, District ­ Hanumangarh for over 35 -40 years, and has acquired title by way of adverse possession and has raised boundary over the said plot; it was alleged that the employees of respondent threatened for removal of the construction of plot in question and, therefore, a prayer was made seeking permanent injunction against the respondent.

(3.) THE trial court framed six issues and after evidence was led by the parties, it came to the conclusion that the plaintiff failed to prove that he was in possession for over 30 years at the disputed plot and he has acquired title by way of adverse possession and that he was a trespasser and was making unauthorized attempts to seek possession of the disputed plot and was seeking the protection from the Court. The land was owned by the Municipal Board and ultimately, dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff.