ARUN PALLI, J. - (1.) THE trial Court decreed the suit of the respondents (plaintiffs) and injuncted appellant (defendant) from interfering in possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property and from demolishing the Amar Kund and other constructions existing thereon. First appeal, preferred by the appellants -defendants was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 28.05.1986. This is how, this Court is seized of this regular second appeal filed by the defendant.
(2.) PARTIES to the lis, would hereafter, be referred to by the original positions in the suit. Plaintiffs, filed a simpliciter suit for injunction, claiming themselves to be the owner in possession of the suit property, which purportedly consisted of a Chabutra, Well, Water -tank (Kund), bathroom and Khurlia for animals. Husband of respondent No.1, purportedly purchased the Well and the land over which Amar Kund was in existence, along with other lands from Chiman Lal etc, vide registered sale deed dated 18.11.1929. Amar Kund, was stated to be comprised in khasra No.2153/1520. Plaintiffs claimed themselves to be in continuous possession of the suit property. Grievance of the plaintiffs was, defendant i.e. Faridabad Complex Administration, despite having no right, title or interest in the suit property, were bent upon to demolish the construction existing therein. So much so, even a notice was issued in this regard on 28.12.1982. Thus, injunction was prayed for.
(3.) IN defence, it was pleaded by the defendant, that the plaintiffs had illegally constructed a Chabutra, bathroom etc. on the suit property, which is otherwise a thoroughfare. The fact, that husband of plaintiff No.1 had purchased the suit property was denied. It was alleged, even if there is any such sale deed, the same is a bogus document. It was maintained, that in the revenue record for the year 1974 -75, the suit property was shown as a thoroughfare. And defendant being the owner, plaintiffs had no right to encroach upon the suit property.;