Observation in Civil Case

Balbir vs Ram Kumar

Suit for Permanent Injunction

Filing of Suit

Plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction underorder 39 Rule 1&2 in the court of Aslam Beg, Civil
Judge, Court No 2, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour (HP), restraining the defendant from digging the
land, raising construction of permanent nature, cutting and falling trees and from changing the
nature of land in any manner and from dispossessing the plaintiff from the land.

Written Statement/Reply:

Written Statement was filed by the defendant by making preliminary objections:

The suit land is in the possession of the defendant and other brothers of the defendant who are not
made party by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff has no local standie to file the present suit.

That the plaintiff has suppressed the facts from this learned court.

Reply:

No replication was intended to be filed.

Issues:

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties following issues were framed on 23.03.2016:

Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of Permanent Prohibitory Injunction? OPP

Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPD

Whether the plaint have no cause of action to file the present suit?

Whether the suit is based on non-joinder and miss-joinder of necessary parties?

Relief: Suit of the plaintiff is partly allowed as per operative part of the judgment.

In order to prove its case, plaintiff examined himself as PW 1 and closed the evidence, on the other
hand defendant examined himself as DW 1 and closed the evidence.

Reasons for Findings:

All these issues being inter-linked and inter-connected are taken up together for discussion in order
to avoid repetition of words and evidence.

Before appreciating ocular evidence of the parties, it was worth to go through the documentary
evidence led by the parties in support of their case.

of the suit land as Fateh Singh mortgaged the suit land in the favors of their father in the year 1979.
He admitted
Plaintiff Evidence:

The witnesses were taken on oath.

Cross Examination:

Cross Examination was done by defendant’s council.

Defendant Evidence:

Defendants Evidence on oath was done.

Cross Examination of Defendants Evidence:

Cross Examination was done by Plaintiffs council.

Arguments:

After the witnesses of defendant and Plaintiff there was Arguments.

Relief/Decree Sheet:

On 20 January 2018, In the light of the findings returned on the aforesaid issues no 1 to 4, the suit of
the plaintiff was partly decreed And defendant was restrained from digging the land, raising the
construction of permanent nature, cutting and felling trees and changing the nature of the land in
any manner.