Full Judgment
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR : JUDGMENT
: S.B.CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.555/2011 Dhanpat & Anr.
versus Mangtu Ram & Anr.
Date of Judgment :: 30.1.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Mr.Mohit Vyas, for the appellant/s.
---- BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
The appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit seeking mandatory and permanent injunction against the respondents-defendants regarding the plot of land situated at Sujandesar, Tehsil Bikaner, inter-alia, with the averments that the plot in question belongs to one Heera Devi and said Heera Devi had given the same to the father of the plaintiffs and since the death of their father, they were in possession of the plot of land.
As the respondents- defendants were seeking to dispossess them from the said plot of land in question and therefore, they were entitled for getting the respondents removed by way of mandatory injunction and permanent injunction not to disturb their possession.
2 While defendants No.1 and 2 were set ex-parte, the defendant No.3 appeared, however, did not file any written statement.
The evidence was led by the plaintiffs and patta (Exhibit1) in the name of Heera Devi was exhibited.
However, no evidence was produced showing how the plot of land stood transferred in their favour and / or they got right / title to the said plot of land.
The trial court on considering the evidence came to the conclusion that the land in question being immovable property, the plaintiffs cannot get any right in absence of any registered document and consequently, dismissed the suit filed by the appellants.
The FiRs.Appellate Court, after hearing the parties, came to the same conclusion and dismissed the fiRs.appeal.
I have heard learned counsel for the appellants.
Both the courts below have concurrently found that the plaintiffs have failed to prove either the title and / or the possession of the suit property and therefore, they were not entitled to any injunction.
The said findings does not call for any interference, the same being pure findings of facts.
No substantial question of law arises in the appeal, the same is dismissed.
The stay application is also dismissed.
(ARUN BHANSALI).J.
rm/57