Back
PANKAJ JAIN
Gian Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rama Kumari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Jain, J.
1. Plaintiff is in second appeal. Suit was filed seeking decree of permanent injunction in form of restrain against the defendants from dispossessing and interfering in any manner in the peaceful cultivating possession of the plaintiff over the land described in the headnote of the plaint.
2. For convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to by their original position in the suit i.e. the appellant as the plaintiff and the respondents as the defendants.
3. Plaintiff claimed that he is co-sharer in the suit property and was occupying the land in dispute. He further claims himself to be in possession thereof as a tenant relying upon the entries in Jamabandi for the year 2005-2006.
4. Suit was contested by defendants No. 1 and 3 who filed joint written statement. Apart from taking preliminary objections, the defendants contended that the plaintiff is neither a co-sharer nor is occupying any part of the suit land as a tenant. The property already stands partitioned vide order dated 12th of November, 2010 passed by Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Mukerian. Appeal preferred by the plaintiff against the said order stands dismissed by Collector, Mukerian vide o
Lawful possession as a tenant requires proof of rent payment; mere entries in land records are insufficient.
A co-owner's possession of joint property is deemed possession for all co-owners until partition, negating exclusive possession claims.
When the plaintiff's title to the property is in dispute and there is a threat of dispossession, the plaintiff should sue for declaration of title and the consequential relief of injunction.
Possession claims must be substantiated with specific evidence of ownership and cannot rely solely on assertions without proper pleadings.
The legal principle established in the judgment is the application of the inter se rights of co-sharers and ownership of the suit property.
Possession of land, even if unauthorized, cannot be disturbed without legal procedure; ownership claimed must be substantiated with evidence.
Continuous possession must be proven to obtain an injunction; mere revenue entries are not conclusive if rebutted by evidence.
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
