IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 10.03.2026 Saloni ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Jiwan and others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. C.L.Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Paras Kakkar, Advocate for the respondent.

******

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Second Appeal has been filed by defendant No.4 against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned District Courts; whereby the suit for possession filed by the plaintiff/respondent no.1 herein, has been decreed by both the District Courts.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/contesting respondent No.1 has filed suit seeking possession of the suit property as described in the plaint. It is the pleaded case of the plaintiff that as per the Jamabandi for the year 2001-2002, plaintiff alongwith his uncles was owner of the land measuring 1K in Khasra No. 1405 to the extent of 1/4th share. It was pleaded that other co-sharers have sold their shares and vendees have taken possession and raised construction. Therefore, purchasers are in exclusive possession of the property marked as ABCD. It was pleaded that the remaining property is marked as EFGB in the site plan and that plaintiff is entitled to recover the possession of the same. It was further pointed out that plaintiff had previously filed civil suit for permanent injunction and possession. The suit for possession was withdrawn on the statements of respondents No. 1 to 4 by reserving right to sue if the property in dispute was found part of khasra No. 1405. The suit for permanent injunction was continued and ultimately dismissed. The Appeal against the same was also dismissed. A week ago, after the dismissal defendants had raised boundary wall in the property marked as EFGB. Defendant No.5 had also taken illegal possession of part of the property of the plaintiff and raised construction. Accordingly, present suit for possession was filed on 15.05.2003.

3. Upon appraisal of the pleadings and the evidence led by the parties, the learned Additional Civil Judge, Hoshiarpur had decreed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and decree dated 27.09.2012 as follows:

-

“24. In view of my discussions made on the above said issues, the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and the same is hereby decreed with costs for possession of property marked as EFGB in the site plan annexure A bounded as East: Khasra No.1406 property in possession of Rohini Kumar and others, West: Part of Khasra No.1405 in possession of Rattan Chand, North: Road, South: Property in possession of Ruben situated on Fatehgarh Road, Opposite to DAV College Hoshiarpur which is part of Khasra No.1405, Khewat No.308, Khatauni No.331 revenue estate of Premgarh, H.B.No.247, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur as per jamabandi for the year 2001-02. The defendants are given two months time to hand over the possession to the plaintiff from the passing of this judgment and decree and failing which the plaintiff shall be at liberty to take the possession of the suit property by filing execution through Court of law. Undisbursed amount if any be disbursed to the quarter concerned as per rules. Decree sheet be prepared and file be consigned to the record room.”

4. The Civil Appeal field by the defendants was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur vide judgment and decree dated 12.07.2017. Hence present Second Appeal by defendant No.4.

5. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that it is an admitted fact on record that the plaintiff had previously also filed a civil suit in respect of the same property between the same parties and on the same cause of action and seeking the same relief. The said suit had merely been dismissed as withdrawn by the plaintiff vide order dated 03.04.1996, without liberty to file fresh suit. It is contended that therefore, the suit of the plaintiff was barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC; and was not maintainable and has