IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 09.01.2025 Ram Kishan ...Appellant.

Versus Randhir Singh (since deceased) through his LRs ...Respondent(s).

***

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR ----

Present: Mr. Vikram Singh Punia, Advocate for the appellant.

(through video conferencing)

****

Sukhvinder Kaur, J.

The instant Regular Second Appeal has been filed by appellant/

plaintiff against the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below vide which the suit of the plaintiff for possession and for grant of mesne profits was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case as per plaint are that plaintiff is owner of the land measuring 52 bigha 16 biswas comprised in Khewat No.210, Khatoni No.337, as detailed in para No.1 of the plaint, situated at village Sanghore, Sub-Tehsil Babain, District Kurukshetra, as per jamabandi for the year 2010-11. It has been alleged that defendant is owner of land situated at village Ghisarpari, Sub-Tehsil Babain, District Kurukshetra as per jamabandi for the year 2007-08. It has been further alleged that in April, 2011, defendant encroached over a portion of land of plaintiff comprised in khasra No.1310 (6-3), khewat No.210, khatoni No.337, situated at village Sanghore, Sub-Tehsil Babain, District Kurukshetra out of total land as detailed in para No.1 of the plaint. Demarcation of the encroached land was got conducted by the plaintiff from revenue authorities on 21.05.2013, as per which defendant had illegally encroached over some portion of land as mentioned in Para No.1 of the plaint and is in unauthorized possession thereof to the extent of 15 biswas. It has been alleged that 15 biswas land is the suit land which has been illegally encroached by the defendant. When defendant refused to remove the encroachment and to hand over the actual and physical possession of suit land, the present suit for decree for possession of said land was filed, for delivering the possession of such land and to pay mesne profits for unauthorized use and occupation of the encroached land.

3. Upon notice, defendant appeared and filed written statement by taking preliminary objections regarding maintainability; no locus standi; cause of action; estoppel; suit being not property valued for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction; plaintiff being guilty of suppressing true and material facts and the civil court having no jurisdiction to entertain the present suit. On merits, it was alleged that there is boundary of two villages namely Village Ghisarpuri and village Sanghore and stones of boundaries have been fixed and no one can change said boundary. No notice was issued to the defendant before demarcation was got conducted by the plaintiff and as such the exparte demarcation was not sustainable. As the demarcation was conducted in the absence and at the back of the defendant, so reliance placed upon the said demarcation by the plaintiff is totally misplaced and misconceived and has no value in the eyes of law. No encroachment has been made by defendant as alleged by the plaintiff.

4. Then replication was filed by the plaintiff while reiterating the averments made in the plaint and denying the averments made in the written statement.

5. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:-

(i) Whether plaintiff is entitled to decree for possession and for grant of mesne profits, as prayed for? OPP (ii) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable and the plaintiff has no locus standi and cause of action to file the present suit? OPD (iii) Whether the plaintiff has concealed the true and material facts from the Court? OPD (iv) Relief.

5. Thereafter, both the parties led their respective evidence. In order to prove his case, plaintiff examined PW1 Shyam Lal, Retd. Tehsildar, who conducted the demarcation at village Sanghore Sub Tehsil Babain, as per order of Tehsildar Ex.PW1/A, PW2-Balwinder Singh, also supported the version of the plaintiff and plaintiff-Ram Kishan himself s