JUDGMENT :

Nidhi Gupta, J.

1. The defendant No.1 is in second appeal before this Court against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiffs/respondents No.1 and 2 herein, for permanent injunction restraining the appellant/defendant No.1 from illegally and forcibly: a) causing any obstructions in functioning of Management Committee of Respondent; b) Interfering into the lawful and peaceful and exclusive possession of plaintiff in the property marked as ABCD shown as 'red' in colour in the site plan attached with the plaint, measuring 14 Marlas bearing Khata No. 154/222, Khasra No. 18/16/4(0-14), village Garhi, Tehsil Garhshankar (hereinafter The Suit Property'); c)demolishing the existing constructions existing over the suit property, has been decreed.

2. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before the learned trial Court i.e. the appellant as the defendant no.1' and the respondents as the plaintiffs'.

3. The brief facts of the case as put forth in the plaint are that the plaintiff No.1 is a juristic person being the registered Management Committee managing the affairs of plaintiff No.1. Surinder Pal Verma is the President and Paramjit is the Vice President of the said Committee. Vide resolution dated 11.10.2009 passed by the Management Committee, the President and Vice President were authorized to file the suit on behalf of plaintiff No.1. It was the pleaded case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs are in exclusive possession as owners/co-sharers in land measuring 0-14 marlas and marked as ABCD shown in read colour in the site plan measuring 14 marlas bearing Khata No.154/222, Khasra Nos.18//16/4 (0-14) as per Jamabandi for the year 2006-07situated in the area of village Garhi, Tehsil Garhshankar/ the suit property. On the suit property, there are two rooms kutia and submersible pump constructed and installed by followers of plaintiff No.1. Religious pooja place (dhoona) is also in existence since the time of Bapu Kumbh Dass Ji. It was further pleaded that the defendant No.1 is co-sharer in the land of joint Khata whereas defendants No.2 to 4 are strangers and they have no right title or interest in the suit property. Further averment was made in the plaint that for the last about one week, the defendants in connivance with each other were threatening the plaintiffs through members of the Committee that they will forcibly interfere into the lawful, peaceful and exclusive possession of the plaintiffs. The defendants threatened that they will demolish the existing constructions and submersible pump and the Dhoona illegally and forcibly. The said threats of the defendants are wrong, illegal and against law and facts; and the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable loss and injury in case the defendants succeed. The defendants were asked many times to refrain from their activities, however, to no avail. With these averments, the suit was filed.

4. Upon notice, the defendants appeared and filed their written statement contesting the suit denying the averments made in the plaint inter alia stating that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to file the present suit; the plaintiffs had not come to the Court with clean hands; that under the garb of present suit, plaintiffs want to encroach upon the common property; plaintiffs had not joined the Gram Panchayat as party; and the plaintiffs should be directed to produce exact measurement of the site in dispute; the Dhoona shown by the plaintiffs in their site plan and the construction clearly falls within the western rasta which is depicted in the site plan of the defendants which has been prepared at the spot strictly as per revenue record with the measurement; and in case the version of the plaintiffs is admitted then the rasta would be blocked; that the submersible pump also falls within the northern kacha rasta; and therefore, the defendants have every right to block the illegal move of the plaintiffs who cannot be allowed