NANOO @ NANUA SINGH Vs. SORAN SINGH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal under Section 100 CPC has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 13.8.2013 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Deeg, Distt. Bharatpur in Civil Appeal No. 30/2013 confirming the judgment and decree dated 6.7.2013 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Deeg in Civil Suit No. 20/2008.

(2.) THE short facts of the case are that plaintiff appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction with the contention that the disputed property is in ownership and possession of the plaintiff. Since the time of their ancestors they have raised construction over it but the defendants have threatened dispossession, hence suit has been filed. The defendants filed written statement with the contention that the disputed land is part of Khasra No. 693 and it has been allotted by the District Collector to Government Primary School. The court below after considering the merits of the case dismissed the suit and appeal has also been dismissed, hence this appeal.

(3.) THE contention of the appellant is that the ownership is not relevant in the suit for injunction. He is in long settled possession and has acquired possessory title hence the suit must succeed but the court below has erred in dismissing the suit.