RAJENDER PRASHAD Vs. BAJRANG LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 91 days in filing of the appeal stands condoned. RSA-2891-2015(O&M) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that plaintiff Bajrang Lal, resident of Hisar had brought a suit against Rajender Prashad, a resident of Dhani near Jalwala Johar village Kumhariya, Tehsil and District Fatehabad seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering into the cultivating possession of the plaintiff over the land comprised in khasra Nos.110//4 min (7-16), 5(7-8), 6(7-8), 7(8-0), 14(8-0), 15(7-8), 16/2(1-8), 17(8-0), 111//10/2(6-12), 11(8-0), 12/1(6-2), 11(8-0), 12/1(6-8), 125//19/2(2-0), 22/2(5-0), 23/2(2-9), 24/2(2-9) measuring 88 kanals 6 marlas situated in village Kumhariya, Tehsil and District Fatehabad and dispossessing him therefrom besides craving for grant of mandatory injunction directing the defendant to vacate the Dhani of plaintiff constructed in khasra No.110//4 min (0-4) situated at village Kumhariya, Tehsil and District Fatehabad.

(3.) As per the version of the plaintiff, he is owner in possession of the suit land and had constructed his 'Dhani' (Farm- House) therein; he was residing in the said 'Dhani' along with his family members; that the defendant happened to a real brother of the plaintiff; the plaintiff, defendant and their other brother Sh.Pawan Kumar besides Smt.Roshni wife of plaintiff and Smt.Krishna wife of the defendant along with Sunil Kumar son of defendant were booked in a murder case and put behind bars; after the trial Smt.Roshni and Smt.Krishna besides Sunil Kumar were acquitted by Sessions Court, Fatehabad, whereas plaintiff, defendant and Pawan Kumar were convicted; the plaintiff and Pawan Kumar were released on bail by the High Court but the defendant was not granted that concession; in the month of August, 2011, the plaintiff, defendant and Pawan Kumar were acquitted by the High Court; after release from the jail in the month of August, 2011, the defendant had requested the plaintiff that he was in need of residence; since the plaintiff had shifted his residence to Hisar, the said 'Dhani' was lying vacant, therefore the plaintiff permitted the defendant to reside in the said 'Dhani' in the month of August 2011; the defendant had been residing therein as a licencee ever since; subsequently a dispute arose between the parties and the defendant threatened to interfere in cultivating possession of the plaintiff over the suit land; accordingly the plaintiff revoked the licence of the defendant asking him to hand over the vacant possession of 'Dhani' to him but to no effect, rather he threatened to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land and to alienate the specific khasra numbers, giving rise to a cause of action to the plaintiff to bring the suit.