Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the material on record, this Court finds as under.

4.1 The plaintiffs are the members of a Co-operative Housing Society. It was the case of the plaintiffs before the Trial Court that the defendant was also one of the members of the said Society and was occupying a residential tenament, which was adjacent to the common plot of the society. It was the case of the plaintiffs before the Trial Court that the said defendant had encroached upon the common plot of the society for his personal use, which was to be used by all the members of the society. It was prayed before the Trial Court that the said defendant needs to be restrained from doing so and declaration to that effect was also asked for.

4.2 The Trial Court had, on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, framed the following issues, and on the basis of the evidence led before it, answered them as under:

"(i) Whether the plaintiff proves that, the common plot, as mentioned in Para : 1 and 2 of the plaint, should be kept open as per the Rules and Regulation ?

(In affirmative)

(ii) Whether the plaintiff proves that, the defendant intends to use (grab) the said common plot for the construction of his house ?

4.4 Being aggrieved, the original defendant had approached the District Court by filing a Regular Civil Appeal. The Appellate Court below has also examined the issues and has found that the Trial Court has not committed any error. This Court finds that both the Courts below have noted the findings to the effect that, it was common plot of the Co-operative Housing Society and the same is required to be used by all the members of the Society. Both the Courts below have declared the same and the defendant is restrained from using the said common plot, for his personal / commercial use.