- (1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for appellants and sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for respondents.
(2.) This is a plaintiff's appeal under Section 96 of C.P.C., arisen from judgment and decree dated 30.11.2009 and 08.12.2009 respectively passed by Sri Mangal Prasad, Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Agra whereby Court below has dismissed Original Suit No. 791 of 1999 filed by plaintiff-appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'appellants') for relief of permanent injunction.
(3.) Brief facts as transpire from record are that appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction, stating therein that they are owners and in possession over Bungalow No. 29, situated at Gopi Chand Shivhare Road, Agra Cantt., Agra (hereinafter referred to as "disputed property") which is a free hold property. Original owner of disputed property was Mr. Clement Ernest Galestin who has sold it on 12.01.1942 to Syed Ali Raja, Sayyad Fiaz Mustafa and Sayyad Haseen Mustafa. Above persons sold disputed property by means of a registered sale deed dated 26.05.1949 to Dr. A.P. Kapur. After death of Dr. A.P. Kapoor, his heirs sold it, by means of four registered sale deeds dated 24.02.1982 to appellants. Thereafter, appellants became exclusive owners of disputed property. Vide notice dated 21.12.1985 issued by Defence Estate Officer (hereinafter referred to as "DEO"), appellants were directed to refrain from raising any constructions over disputed property. Aforesaid notice was challenged by appellants in Writ Petition No. 2361 of 1986, in which opposite party in writ petition were directed to produce 'Old Grant Lease', but they failed to produce the same. Ultimately vide order dated 26.10.1989, Court restrained defendants from interfering in constructions raised by appellants over disputed property. Appellants spent huge sum in construction of a three star hotel on the land of disputed property, after obtaining permission dated 28.08.1996 from competent authority. Their names were mutated in the records of Cantonment Board. Defendant - Union of India - Ministry of Defence were not paid any grant/rent or tax and appellants are exclusive owners of disputed property which is a 'Free Hold Property' and not 'Old Grant Lease'. Notice dated 30.07.1999 issued by defendant is wrong and illegal. Appellants have filed objection against aforesaid notice. Cost of constructions shown in the notice as Rs.49,600/- is insufficient and respondent has no right or title over disputed property. Representation dated 01.09.1999 of appellants for quashing of above notice has not been considered by respondent. Rather they were issuing threats to appellant for demolition of constructions standing over disputed property. In these circumstances appellants filed the suit in question.;