Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
ALKA SARIN
Rohtash – Appellant
Versus
Sheela devi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Alka Sarin, J.
CM-9333C-2022
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The delay of 163 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned.
RSA No.2688 of 2022
2. Present appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant challenging judgment and decree dated 29.10.2021 passed by the First Appellate Court whereby the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2017 passed by the Trial Court has been reversed and his suit has been dismissed.
3. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction averring in the plaint that he is co-owner and in exclusive possession of 16 Kanals of land, fully described in the plaint, situated in the revenue estate of village Mehchana, Tehsil Farrukhnagar, District Gurugram. It was further averred that the plaintiff-appellant had sown crop of mustard (sarson) on the suit property. However, the defendant-respondent alleged that she had purchased some portion of the suit property and was harassing the plaintiff-appellant with malafide intention to dispossess him. Hence, the present suit. The defendant-respondent appeared and filed her written statement wherein various prel
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....
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's possession of joint property is deemed possession for all co-owners until partition, negating exclusive possession claims.
The legal principle established in the judgment is the application of the inter se rights of co-sharers and ownership of the suit property.
The main legal point established is that a plaintiff must prove joint ownership and possession in a property dispute, and even a co-sharer cannot be injuncted from selling his share of the property.
The plaintiff-appellant failed to prove possession of the property, leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to lack of cogent 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
