BALBIR SINGH ALIAS BHEERA AND OTHERS Vs. GURDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that plaintiff Gurdeep Singh had brought a suit for possession against defendants i.e. Balbir Singh @ Bheera and Heera Singh, both sons and Smt.Harnam Kaur widow of Sohan Singh, all residents of Amritsaria Farm, Ward No.4, Pehowa, District Kurukshetra for the reason that defendants had taken unauthorized possession of the suit land and in earlier litigation between the parties in the form of civil Suit bearing No.348/96 titled as 'Gurdip Singh Vs. Balbir Singh' decided on 24.1.2000, it was so observed mentioning that the plaintiff could file a suit for possession against the defendants with respect to the suit land. The plaintiff had requested the defendants to hand over the possession of the suit land to him but in vain. As such, he approached the Court by way of filing a civil suit.

(2.) On notice, defendants No.1 and 2 had put in appearance. Defendant No.2 had filed a written statement contesting the suit, which was adopted by defendant No.1. In such written statement preliminary objections were taken that suit was barred under Order 2 Rule (II) CPC; suit was under valued; suit was liable to be dismissed on account of concealment of material facts from the Court; that the plaintiff was estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the suit since the defendants had constructed the house in the suit land 36 years ago to the knowledge of the plaintiff and his brother Sarjit Singh and all other concerned, in the process, they have spent a huge amount on the construction and the plaintiff had never raised any objection over the same. On merits, it was denied that the plaintiff is owner of the suit land, rather it was contended that defendants are owners of the same; that the suit property is in the form of a house comprised in Rectangle No.95, killa No.27. In the end, a prayer for dismissal of the suit was made.

(3.) As far defendant No.3 is concerned, she had not appeared despite service and was proceeded against ex-parte.