Nirmal Yadav, J. - (1.) C.M. No. ___________of 2008:
(2.) DURING the course of arguments learned Counsel for the respondents filed an application in Court for placing on record photographs, description of construction made over Khasra No. 296 and site plan of plot No. 2 as Annexures R -1, R -2 and R -3, respectively. In the interest of justice and for the just decision of the case, the application is allowed and Annexures R -1 to R -3 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Registry is directed to assign number to the application. Plaintiff Prem Kumar Jain has challenged the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1983 passed by Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, vide which judgment and decree dated 25.8.1982 passed by Senior Sub Judge, Gurgaon decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, was set aside.
(3.) BRIEF facts leading to the present case are that Raja Rati Ram was the owner of three kothis situated in Civil Lines, Gurgaon. As per Ak -Shijra, Ex. D11 and Field book, Ex. D10, Kothi No. 1 was situated in Field No. 296 measuring 2 bighas - 14 biswas - 17 biswansi & 8 yards; Kothi No. 2 in Field No. 297 measuring 1 bigha -13 biaswas - 14 biswansi & 6 yards and Kothi No. 3 in Field No. 298 measuring 1 bigha - 19 biaswas - 7 biswansi & 55 yards. As per Jamabandi for the year 1977 -78, the entire land was owned by Provincial Government. However, Khasra No. 296 measuring measuring 2 bighas - 14 biswas - 17 biswansi & 8 yards was shown to be in possession of Satish Kumar son of Rati Ram; Khasra No. 297 measuring 1 bigha - 13 biaswas - 14 biswansi & 6 yards was in possession of Rati Ram and Khasra No. 298 measuring 1 bigha - 19 biaswas - 7 biswansi & 55 yards was in possession of Smt. Sushila Rani, wife of Rati Ram. It appears that a family settlement took place, which was recognised by decree dated 4.4.1952, Ex. P2.;