Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN JAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ALKA SARIN
Nihal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Naveen Yadav – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ALKA SARIN, J.
1. The present appeal is by the plaintiff-appellant against the judgements and decrees dated 17.04.2015 and 04.10.2018 passed by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court dismissing his suit.
2. Briefly, the facts are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendant-respondent from encroaching any portion of the suit land or blocking the Rasta. It was averred that the plaintiff-appellant is the owner in possession of the suit land having received the same in a court decree dated 14.09.1995 in Suit No. 8/95 titled as Nihal vs. Munshi & Ors. and since then the plaintiff -appellant had been in possession of the suit land as owner along with the Rasta. As per the plaintiff-appellant the defendant-respondent had purchased 7/51 share from one Ram Niwas S/o Rohtas vide sale deed dated 19.10.2012 to whom the said share was sold by the plaintiff-appellant on 08.05.2000. According to the plaintiff-appellant the defendant-respondent had threatened to encroach upon the portion of the suit land of the plaintiff-appellant and was also trying to encroach and block the Rasta which Rasta was shown in the decree passed in Sui
In absence of exclusive possession evidence, a co-owner cannot seek a permanent injunction against another co-owner, and must pursue partition for resolution.
A co-owner cannot seek permanent injunction against another co-owner without proof of exclusive possession or ouster. The remedy for a co-owner out of possession is to file for partition, not to seek....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to prove their title on the suit property and the court's reliance on evidence to determine ownership and enti....
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.
The court affirmed that documentary evidence of property ownership supersedes claims of possession without supporting evidence.
A co-owner's possession of joint property is deemed possession for all co-owners until partition, negating exclusive possession claims.
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
