JUDGMENT

1 The petitioner has filed the instant revision against order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the Additional District Judge, Jammu (‘the trial Court’ for short) whereby in the application filed by the respondent/defendant, a direction has been issued to the petitioner/plaintiff for removing the gate if the same has been installed in front of the plot of respondent/defendant. A further direction has been issued by the trial Court that in case the gate is not removed, the SHO Police Station,Pacca Danga, Jammu shall go on spot and assist the respondent/defendant in removing the said gate.

2 Heard and considered.

3 It appears that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed a suit against the respondent/defendant before the trial Court seeking possession/

mandatory injunction directing the respondent/defendant to handover the vacant possession of land measuring 3 marlas, 234 sq. feet falling under khasra No. 95 min situated at Karan Nagar, Jammu. Compensation in the amount of Rs.3.00 lacs for illegal occupation of the aforesaid land has also been sought. The petitioner/plaintiff has further sought consequential relief of permanent injunction against the respondent/defendnat restraining him from changing the nature of the suit land as also of the green strip towards the eastern side of the suit land.

4 Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner/plaintiff before the trial Court is that he has purchased the suit land vide a sale deed dated 28.05.1999, whereas, vide sale deed dated 03.04.1979, the respondent/defendant purchased 10 marlas of land adjacent to the suit land. It has been pleaded that an additional piece of land measuring 3 marlas, 189 sq. feet was purchased by the respondent/defendant vide sale deed dated 09.12.1998 towards the northern side of the plot of petitioner/plaintiff. Thus, according to the petitioner/plaintiff, the respondent/defendant owns land measuring 13 marlas and 189 sq. feet adjacent to the suit land owned by the petitioner/plaintiff. It has been further pleaded that the respondent/defendant dismantled the wall of his plot towards the plot of the petitioner/plaintiff and included the suit land belonging to the petitioner/plaintiff within his land, where-after, he filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against the petitioner/plaintiff before the Court of learned Munsiff (Forest Magistrate),Jammu. It has been pleaded that, towards the eastern side of the suit land, there exists a Page2of9 green strip in the form of slope adjoining to the house of the respondent/defendant. It has been further submitted that the respondent/defendant is in the process of digging and removing soil from the slope which belongs to Hari Tara Chand Charitable Trust and this is going to cause extensive damage to the residential house of the petitioner/plaintiff as also the suit land. It has been submitted that the respondent/defendant has made several attempts to remove the slope and the green strip to encroach upon the said land.

5 The respondent/defendant in his written statement pleaded that he has not encroached upon any portion of the land belonging to the petitioner/plaintiff. According to the respondent/defendant, it is the petitioner/plaintiff, who has encroached upon 8 to 9 marlas of land. It has been pleaded that it is the petitioner/plaintiff who is trying to encroach upon the green strip in the form of slope towards the eastern side of the plot purchased by the respondent/defendant from one Vijay Kumar. According to the respondent/defendant, neither he, nor the petitioner/plaintiff has any right upon the green strip unless specifically permitted by Hari Tara Chand Charitable Trust. It has been further contended that the petitioner/plaintiff has constructed a house and he has also encroached upon the green strip by raising 20 feet high concrete retention wall. It has been contended that the petitioner/plaintiff has also constructed his kitchen on the said green strip.

6 During the pendency of the suit, an application cam