- (1.) The appeal being No.328/2008 and appeal No.331/2008 filed under Section 100 of CPC, arise out of the judgments and decrees dated 30.04.2004 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kishangarh, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the appellate court") in Civil Appeal No.12/2002 and Civil Appeal No.11/2002 respectively, whereby the appellate court has dismissed the said appeals and confirmed the judgments and decrees dated 23.01.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Kishangarh, District Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Civil Suits No.257/1993 and 254/1993 filed by the respondent No.1-plaintiff. Both the appeals involving similar facts and filed by the same appellants are being decided by this common order.
(2.) The respondent No.1-plaintiff in both the appeals had filed their respective suits against the present appellants and the respondent No.2-original defendants, seeking permanent and mandatory injunction in respect of the plots situated at Lecturer Colony, Kishangarh, alleging interalia that the said plaintiffs were allotted patta in respect of the suit plots by the respondent No.2-Municipal Board and were also granted permission to put up construction thereon by the Board, however when the plaintiffs started putting up construction, the appellants-defendants tried to remove the same and put the barbed wire fencing, by deploying their sepoyes. The respondents-plaintiffs, therefore, had filed their respective suits. The appellants-defendants had resisted the said suits by filing the written statements, denying the allegations made in the plaint, and contending interalia that the barbed wire fencing was there since 1950 and the defendants were in possession of the suit plots. According to the appellants-defendants the plots in question were not allotted to the plaintiffs and the suits were not maintainable without serving statutory notice under Section 80 of CPC.
(3.) The trial court after appreciating the evidence on record, decreed both the suits by restraining the appellants-defendants from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs in using the land in question, and further directing the appellants to remove the pillars and barbed wire fencing. Being aggrieved by the said judgments and decrees, the appellants had preferred the appeals before the appellate court, which have been dismissed vide the impugned judgments and decrees.;