Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Rajendra Bahadur Singh Chouhan – Appellant
Versus
Prakashwati – Respondent
ORDER
1. This civil second appeal is preferred against the judgement and decree dated 24.07.2019 passed by learned Additional District Judge No.5, Ajmer (for brevity, 'learned appellate Court') in Civil Appeal No.6/2017 (80/2007) CIS Registration No.372/2014 where by, while dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellants/defendants (for brevity, 'the defendants'), the judgement dated 08.03.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) City-North, Ajmer (for brevity, 'the learned trial Court') decreeing the Civil Suit No.202/2003 filed by the respondent/plaintiff (for brevity, 'the plaintiff') for mandatory and permanent injunction, has been upheld.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiff filed a suit stating therein that he was under ownership and possession of a plot admeasuring 369.38 square yards as described in Para No.1 of the plaint. It was alleged that on 10.08.2003, the defendants have gathered construction material towards eastern side of his plot and have started raising construction of a wall encroaching upon 30 feet of his plot. Therefore, the decree as aforesaid was prayed for.
3. The defendant in his written statement submitted that he has raised c
Even in absence of prayer for decree of declaration, suit simplicitor for injunction is maintainable when there is no cloud over ownership of subject property.
A plaintiff can seek permanent and mandatory injunctions based on established possession of the property, regardless of whether a declaration of title has been formally sought.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a party to provide sufficient evidence of exclusive possession to support a claim for injunction over disputed property.
In suits governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the burden is on the defendant to prove adverse possession, and the plaintiff needs to establish title and possession. The legal position ....
The burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to establish their case, and the court will uphold decisions based on evidence presented, rejecting contentions of delay and laches, and the applicability ....
A suit for mandatory injunction can be maintainable without a recovery of possession claim; limitation starts when the plaintiff recognizes non-compliance.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 100 of the C.P.C. is confined to substantial questions of law, prohibiting re-evaluation of evidence or findings of fact.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
