R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) THIS is a defendants' appeal and has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.9.1999, passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, who affirmed the judgment and decree dated 4.5.1998, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Fatehgarh Sahib, who decreed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent Kaka Singh son of Budh Singh for permanent injunction restraining the present appellants from interfering in any manner in the exclusive peaceful, cultivating possession of the plaintiff over the land, as fully detailed in the heading of the plaint situated in the revenue estate of village Peer Jain Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib.
(2.) THE case set up by the respondent-plaintiff in the trial Court was that he was in exclusive possession of the suit land comprised in Rect. No. 29 Khasra No. 8 min (4-14) and Rect. No. 18, Khasra No. 14(8-0), situated in village Peer Jain and that the defendants had no right to interfere in his possession till the partition is effected between the parties thorough Court of competent jurisdiction. The plaintiff pleaded that defendants are also recorded in possession of different Khasra numbers. Mohinder Singh defendant is recorded in exclusive possession of the land comprised in Khatoni No. 23, defendant Nahar Singh has been recorded in possession over the land comprised in Khatoni No. 24 and Sucha Singh defendant has been recorded in exclusive possession over the land comprised in Khatoni No. 21. The plaintiff has also installed electric motor bearing A/C No. R-2-109 in his name in the suit land. It was further averred by the plaintiff that earlier he filed a suit for injunction but the same was withdrawn by him on account of compromise dated 4.10.1995. Again the defendants gave him the threat to interfere in his possession. Hence the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff. Notice of the suit was given to the defendants. Defendants admitted that the parties to the suit are the co-sharers. Other allegations were denied by the defendants and it was submitted that Khasra No. 14 of Rect. No. 18 is not in exclusive possession of the plaintiff. Out of this Khasra Number 1 Kanal on the Eastern side is in possession of Mohinder Singh defendant, whereas, 1 Kanal 8 Marlas on the same side is in possession of Nahar Singh defendant. Similarly, out of Khasra No. 8 min of Rect. No. 29, area measuring 1 Kanal 14 marlas on the Eastern side of said Khasra number is in possession of Mohinder Singh defendant and the intervening boundary of the said Khasra number is beyond the said 1 Kanal 14 marlas. On the Western side and on the Eastern side the land is in possession of Mohinder singh including the said 1 Kanals 14 Marlas. While assailing the filing of the earlier suit, it was averred that suit was withdrawn by the plaintiff unconditionally, and therefore, it estopped the plaintiff from filing the second suit on the same set of facts. It was further averred by the defendants that plaintiff did not approach the civil Court with clean hands. He had suppressed the material facts and, therefore, he is not entitled to the relief of injunction.
(3.) THE plaintiff filed a rejoinder to the written statement of the defendants in which he reiterated the allegations made in the plaint by denying those made in the written statement. He stated that he withdrew the earlier suit on account of the compromise which was executed on 4.10.1995 in which both the parties agreed that they will withdraw all the civil suits pending in the Courts and defendant will withdraw his suit first. In compliance with the said agreement, Nahar Singh defendant and Jarnail Singh withdrew the suit on 10.10.1995. The process of partition of the entire Khewat including the suit land was almost likely to be completed but the defendants backed out from the partition. Now, again they are threatening to dispossess him from the land which is in his possession.;