- (1.) HEARD Shri Rajendra Dobhal, counsel for the appellants and Shri Gopal Narayan, Counsel for the respondent.
(2.) BY the present second appeal filed under section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, the appellants have prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 9. 9. 2003 passed by the Additional District Judge/viith Fast Track Court, Dehradun by which the appeal of the defendant-appellants has been dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 9. 10. 2001 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division/xith Fast Track Court, Dehradun has been confirmed.
(3.) BRIEFLY stated, a suit was filed by the plaintiff Raja Ram stating therein that he is the owner of his ancestral property being plot Nos. 54 and 55, Hathibarkala, Dehradun. In the north of the property of the plaintiff, the defendant is in occupation of property No. 51 /52. The plaintiff has moved an application for demarcation of the boundary before the revenue authorities which was objected by late Faqir Chand, father of the defendant. In paragraph 3 of the plaint, the plaintiff has stated as under :- "that a few years ago, late Faqir Chand, father of the defendant made a small encroachment on the property of the plaintiff. Then as per the legal advice given to him he moved an application for demarcation of the boundary before the revenue authorities. The late Fakir Chand father of the defendant filed objections. In the said objections, the said Shri Fakir Chand contended that Khasra Nos. 609, 610 and 611 of settlement of 1937-38 was his ancestral property and khasra Nos. 612 and 613 of the settlement of 1937-38 was the ancestral property of the plaintiff and Khasra No. 616/3 was recorded in the name of the plaintiff in 1378 fasli. However, as the said khasra numbers were abadi numbers, the application for demarcation was rejected on the technical ground and the parties were left to get their grievance resolved in Civil Court. ";