SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(P&H) 106

VINOD K.SHARMA
Harjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jarnail Singh – Respondent


Judgment

VINOD K.SHARMA, J.

1. This regular second appeal by defendant/appellants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.04.2009 passed by the learned Courts below vide which the appellants have been directed to demolish the wall constructed in khasra No.23/2/1 (1 kanal 19 marlas), which is under the ownership of the respondent/plaintiffs. The plaintiffs brought a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction, seeking demolition of wall ABCD constructed by the defendant/appellants in khasra No.23/2/1, and for restraining them from raising further construction.

2. The defendants did not dispute the facts that the plaintiffs were the owners of khasra No.23/2/1 measuring 1 kanal 19 marlas, but the case set up by the defendant/appellants was, that the wall is constructed in khasra No.23/1 (19 marlas) belonging to the defendant/appellants. The suit filed by the plaintiffs, therefore, deserved to be dismissed.

3. In support of the case, the appellants relied upon the demarcation report, said to have been carried out in the presence of the Panchayat, the reliance was also placed on an agreement under which the defendant/appellants were allowed to raise the wall. The case of t






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top