SHOVA GURUNG Vs. SIDDHARTH RAJ GURUNG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has filed Title Suit No. 02 of 2018 against Siddharth Raj Gurung-her nephew, Secretary, UD&HD, District Collector and Sub-Divisional Magistrate as defendants in the same order. It seeks a decree of confirming her possession of the suit premises; a declaration that defendant no.1 has no connection with Schedule 'B' premise and the premises shown in A to F of Annexure-7 and a decree restraining the defendant no.1 from entering and interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over Schedule 'B' premise.

(2.) The plaint reflects that most of her grievances are against the defendant no.1. The plaintiff did not assert that defendant nos. 2 to 4 were adverse parties. In fact reading paragraph 33 (A) of the plaint, three things are certain i.e. '

(3.) During the trial the plaintiff preferred an application seeking a direction upon the defendant no.1 to cross examine the witnesses of defendant nos. 3 and 4 first to be followed by cross-examination by the plaintiff. In the application it was pleaded that the defendants were contesting parties and as such cross-examination of the witness of defendant nos.3 and 4 has to be done by the defendant no.1 first as they were sailing in the same boat. It was also pointed out that witness Shri. D.B. Rasaily cited by defendant nos.3 and 4 earlier was cited as witness by defendant no.1 and when he was cited by defendant nos. 3 and 4 later, defendant no.1 dropped his name thus proving that there was collusion between the defendants.