CHANDRAVEER SINGH Vs. SAUBHAGYA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r) Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order dated 24.08.2016 passed by the trial court, whereby the application filed by the respondents under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed and injunction has been granted in favour of the respondents-plaintiffs.

(2.) The suit for partition, declaration and permanent injunction was filed by the respondents for properties indicated in para-4 of the plaint belonging to Late Rao Sawai Prithvi Singhji. It was, inter alia, claimed in the plaint that Late Rao Sawai Prithvi Singhji was Thikanedar of Bijoliya, who had four sons-Kesari Singh, Goverdhan Singh, Madan Singh and Vijay Singh. It was claimed that Rao Sawai Prithvi Singhji died in the year 1913 and by order dated 22.09.1959, the Jagir Commissioner, Rajasthan, Jaipur, declared the list of personal properties of Late Rao Sawai Prithvi Singhji, which properties belong to the Hindu Undivided Family. The plaintiffs made a reference to a suit filed by the defendant-Chandraveer Singh and his mother in the year 1983, which came to be decided in the year 2001 and it was submitted that the said suit was confined to Govind Vilas, Mukut Mahal and Panera situated in Garh Bijoliya and was based on agreement dated 14.04.1968. It was indicated that against the decree dated 01.11.2001 passed by the trial court, first appeal and second appeal were dismissed and the Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court filed by the plaintiffs ultimately came to be decided against them on 24.07.2015. It was alleged that the defendant in the garb of execution of the decree, was seeking to take possession of the property beyond the decree and that rest of the properties had not been partitioned. Based on the alleged exclusive possession, plea of adverse possession was also raised and ultimately it was prayed in the suit as under:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...

(3.) The appellant herein filed written statement, inter alia, relying on an agreement/compromise dated 14.01.1958 executed between Goverdhan Singh and Madan Singh and another agreement dated 14.04.1968 executed between Chandraveer Singh and Vijay Singh. It was also claimed that in the earlier suit filed between the parties, the issue pertaining to the nature of the properties already stood concluded. It was alleged that the plaintiffs, after vacating the premises, regarding which, the decree dated 01.11.2001 was passed, had occupied other part of the Palace, which part was indicated in green colour in the map filed along with the written statement. It was claimed that except for the reoccupied portion marked in green colour in the map, the defendant was in possession of the suit property. Counter-claim seeking possession of the area marked in green in the map was also filed.