CHHOTEY LAL AND ORS. Vs. SMT. MEERA DEVI
LAWS(ALL)-1984-1-88
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 01,1984

Chhotey Lal And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
Smt. Meera Devi Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAM PRASAD TEWARI V. SANKOOR TEWARI [REFERRED TO]
MIDNAPUR ZAMINDARY COMPANY LTD VS. KUMAR NARESH NARAYAN ROY [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Kamleshwar Nath, J. - (1.)PLOT No. 951, measuring 3 Bighas 1 Biswa of village Munda, District Unnao, was a grove initially held by Lala. He had two sons Mokhai and Jham. Defendants Nos. 4 and 5, Bharat and Babu Lal are the sons of Jham. Mokhai's only son Baldeo had four sons - -Ram Swaroop (dead) and defendant -appellants Nos. 1 to 3 Chhotey Lal Sri Pal and Kunwar Pal, Smt. Meera Devi claimed to be the widow of Ram Swaroop. The plaint case, in substance, was that the defendant -appellants were not allowing her to use property and where, on the contrary, cutting away the trees and had actually cut away the trees worth Rs. 8,000/ -. She therefore sued for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant -appellants from interfering with her possession over the property and also for Rs. 2,000/ - as her share of damages of the total value of Rs. 8,000/ -. In this sense, she claimed her share in the property in dispute to be with.
(2.)I have heard learned counsel, for the appellants Sri H.N. Tilhari and learned counsel for the respondents Sri P.L. Misra.
The defendant -appellants pleaded that the plaintiff -respondent was not the wife of Ram Swaroop at all, but was the wife of one Ram Bali alias Baba Ram Saran Das. It was said that it is they who had been on possession of the property and the plaintiff -respondent had nothing to do with it. They admitted that they had cut away some of the trees and had the intention of removing all the trees in order to bring the land under cultivation.

(3.)IT is the concurrent finding of fact of both the courts below that Smt. Meera Devi plaintiff -respondent is the wife of Ram Swaroop. They accepted the valuation of the trees given by the defendant -appellants, namely, Rs. 2,000/ -, and, therefore, held her to be entitled to a decree for Rs. 500/ - as damages. Consequently, the suit was decreed for an injunction to restrain the defendant -appellants from interfering with the plaintiff -respondent's enjoyment of the property as also from cutting the trees and further for a decree of Rs. 500/ - by way of damages. As already stated, the lower appellate Court agreed with the findings recorded by the trial Court and the defendant -appellants' appeal was dismissed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.