POORAN RAM Vs. GOMARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Second Appeal has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') under Sec. 100 CPC against the judgment and decree dtd. 7/2/1995 passed by Additional Civil Judge, Jhunjhunu (for short 'the appellate court') in Civil Appeal No. 51/91, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent No.1-defendant (for short 'the defendant') has been allowed and judgment and decree dtd. 26/3/1991 passed by M.J.M. 1st Class, Jhunjhunu (for short 'the trial court') in Civil Suit No. 86/85 decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for declaration and permanent injunction, has been set aside and consequently the suit has also been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs had filed a suit before the trial court and sought declaration that order dtd. 16/8/85 of Gram Panchayat, Jai Pahadi be declared as illegal and void and also sought the permanent injunction that if wall mentioned in para No.(kha) (ga) of the suit is demolished then it may be ordered to be reconstructed and also sought the compensation of Rs.5,000.00. Plaintiffs in their suit stated that plaintiffs had constructed boundary wall measuring 6 to 7 feet in length and 3 to 4 feet in height towards the eastern side of his agricultural land. Defendant had political rivalry against the plaintiffs. In order to harass the plaintiffs, he started claiming way in the agricultural land of the plaintiffs. Defendant was already having his way to his house, land and bada from the north side as per the plan submitted alongwith the suit.

(3.) Defendant had replied to the averments made in the plaint of the plaintiffs and denied that he had a way from north side of his land. It was stated that plaintiffs had constructed the boundary wall to obstruct his way and also stated that plaintiffs had not filed reply of the notice of Gram Panchayat and also stated that without giving the notice under the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, suit was not maintainable.