JAGDISH NARAYAN SHARMA & ANR Vs. MANGILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal under Section 100 of CPC has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs, challenging the judgment and decree dated 05.02.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1 Jaipur, District Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the appellate court") in Civil Regular Appeal No.02/98, whereby the appellate court has allowed the appeal of the respondent-defendant and set-aside the judgment & decree dated 26.05.1997 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Jaipur District, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court").

(2.) The appellants-plaintiffs had filed the suit seeking declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent-defendant alleging interalia that the plaintiffs were in possession of the land in question since the time of their ancestors, and the defendant was trying to encroach upon the said land and put up construction thereon. It was alleged in the plaint interalia that the appellants-plaintiffs were in possession of the Bara as described in the plaint, which was being used by them since last many years. The appellants-plaintiffs had also submitted the application to the Gram Panchayat Mundiya for putting up construction on the said land, however the said Gram Panchayat Mundiya had not granted the permission. Subsequently the respondent-defendant had threatened the plaintiffs to take possession of the land in question forcibly and put up construction thereon, and hence the suit was filed. The said suit was resisted by the respondent-defendant by filing the written statement, denying the allegations made in the plaint, and further contending interalia that the plaintiffs were not in possession of the so called Bara. According to the respondent-defendant, he was issued patta by the Gram Panchyat Mundiya in respect of the part of the land in question, and he was entitled to raise the construction on the land which was owned by him.

(3.) The trial court after appreciating the evidence on record, decreed the suit of the appellants-plaintiffs by declaring that the appellants were the owners of the Bara as described in para 1 of the plaint, and the respondent-defendant was restrained from making any encroachment or putting up any construction on the said Bara. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the respondent had preferred the appeal before the appellate court which has been allowed vide the impugned judgment and decree. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs.