JAMNA Vs. BHUWANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Bhura Ram filed a suit against defendant-respondent-Bhuwana for permanent injunction restraining him from raising construction over the public lane in question. Bhura Ram expired during pendency of the First Appeal and now deceased Bhura Ram is being represented by his legal representatives appellants Nos. 1 to 7.

(2.) Brief facts averred in the plaint, which are necessary for just decision of the case, are that the plaintiff appellants own and possess a house bounded by Kachcha four walls. Towards Southern side of their house, there is Government lane and after that, the house of the defendant is situated. On 30-7-72, the defendant started construction on the plaintiff's land and the Government lane (hereinafter referred to as 'the disputed land') by which, his egress and ingress was closed. In spite of repeated request of the plaintiff to the defendant for not making construction over the disputed land, the defendant proceeded with the construction, which necessitated to file the present suit.

(3.) The defendant filed his written statement, in which, he admitted that there is a Kachcha house of the plaintiff. However, he denied that there is open land of the plaintiff. He further averred in his written statement that due to his proposed construction in progress the ingress and egress of the plaintiff is not going to be affected. In the written statement, the defendant stated that he does not want to close the lane but wants to make construction only on his own land, which is in his possession from the time of his ancestors.