ORAN SINGH Vs. GOVIND SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel. This petition is filed by the petitioners who are defendants challenging the order dated 30.11.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sironj, District Vidisha in Civil Appeal No. 02/06 whereby the appellate Court has reversed the order dated 26.4.2006 passed by Civil Judge Class II, Sironj in Civil Suit No. 10A/05 whereby the trial Court has refused to grant injunction in favour of the plaintiffs.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that respondents 1 to 3 - plaintiffs filed a suit against the petitioners defendants for declaration of their title and permanent injunction in respect of the land bearing survey No. 206 having an area 1.555 hectares, situated in village Echanwada, Patwari Halka No. 24, Tahsil Sironj, District Vidisha, alleging that they are the owners of the said land and the recorded in their name as Bhumiswami. The respondents plaintiffs have filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for restraining the present petitioners defendants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs. Trial Court refused to grant injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. This order was challenged by the respondents plaintiffs by filing an appeal before the Additional District Judge. Said appeal was allowed by the impugned order. Hence, this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE appellate Court found that the said Panchanama is not as reliable as the khasra entries is favour of the plaintiffs. Khasra entries show that the name of the plaintiffs is recorded as Bhumiswami. Defendants in their written statement have also admitted the fact that the names of the plaintiffs are recorded as Bhumiswami against the said land. Defendants have filed an application Annexure P-5 only in respect of recording their names to be in possession of the property and on their application, the Tahsildar had directed the Patwari to submit his report, who prepared the report behind the back of the plaintiffs. Considering all these facts, the appellate Court found that the Panchanama prepared by the Patwari cannot be more reliable than the Khasra entries.