Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARKESH MANUJA
Jagmeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
Resham Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral)
By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment and decree dated 09.05.2023 passed by the Court of District Judge, Amritsar (hereinafter to be referred as "First Appellate Court"), whereby first appeal of the appellant-plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Baba Bakala Sahib (hereinafter to be referred as "trial Court"), partly decreeing the suit for permanent injunction, was dismissed.
2. Briefly stating, the appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants themselves or through their agents and attorneys from interfering into his peaceful possession over the suit property comprised in Khasra No.202, Khewat No.430, Khatauni No.885, as per jamabandi for the year 2016-17, situated in Village Tangra, Tehsil Baba Bakala Sahib, District Amritsar marked as ABCD' and shown in Yellow' colour in the site plan and for restraining the defendants from creating hindrance in the construction work being carried out by the appellant-plaintiff in his owned property marked as CDEF' and shown in Green' colour in the site plan and for posses
Failure to prove ownership and possession over the disputed property resulted in dismissal of the appeal.
Possession of land, even if unauthorized, cannot be disturbed without legal procedure; ownership claimed must be substantiated with evidence.
Civil Law - Rendition of a decree for permanent prohibitory - Ipso facto they are concluded to rather accept conclusions as made therein, in, as much, as defendants making encroachments upon a portio....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the relief of possession by way of demolition, as an alternative to the principal relief, could be accorded by the court.
A suit for perpetual injunction is not maintainable when encroachment is established, particularly if the land has been acquired by the state, barring the plaintiff's cause of action.
The plaintiff must prove ownership outside any acquired land, and shifting the burden to the defendant is legally erroneous.
Trespassers cannot obtain an injunction against true owners without proving identifiable rights in the property.
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
