Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
NIDHI GUPTA
Naib Singh – Appellant
Versus
Darbara Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nidhi Gupta, J.
The appellants before this Court are defendant No. 2(ii) and defendant No.3 in second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below, whereby the suit of the plaintiffs for permanent injunction, has been decreed by both the Courts below.
2. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before the learned trial Court i.e. the appellants are the defendant No.2(ii) and defendant No.3'; and the respondents No. 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs'.
4. Brief facts of the case as stated in the plaint are that the plaintiffs had filed a suit seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining defendants No.1 to 3 from interfering into the ownership and possession of the plaintiffs as co-sharers in respect of land measuring 18 kanal 3 marlas comprised in Sq. No.89 killa No.8/6(0-4), 8/15/4(0-8), sq.No.90 killa No.13/1(5-3), khasra No.395(4-0), khasra No.397(8-8) vide jamabandi for the year 2012-13 and mutation No.3589 sanctioned on 19.12.2014 situated in village Kurangawali, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa, as fully detailed and described in the head note of the plaint/ hereinafter 'suit property'; and the defendants be also restra
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 of land, even if unauthorized, cannot be disturbed without legal procedure; ownership claimed must be substantiated with evidence.
The legal principle established in the judgment is the application of the inter se rights of co-sharers and ownership of the suit property.
A co-owner's possession of joint property is deemed possession for all co-owners until partition, negating exclusive possession claims.
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....
Lawful possession as a tenant requires proof of rent payment; mere entries in land records are insufficient.
Appellate courts cannot interfere with factual findings established by lower courts unless substantial legal errors are demonstrated.
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
