1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1641/2008 Gopa Ram. vs. Kan Singh & Ors. S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1641/2008 Gopa Ram. vs. Kan Singh and others. Date : 1.4.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.V Srivastava, for the appellant. Mr.BL Bhati, for the respondents. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appellant is aggrieved against the order of the trial court 11.1.2008 by which his application for grant of injunction was dismissed by the trial court. The trial court appointed a Commissioner who reported that on spot, a room is in existence. The lock was opened by Kalu Ram and in the room, there are construction material lying and there is a water tank also on the land in question. The trial court also observed that the plaintiffs produced the receipt of Rs.60/- over which the signature of Sarpanch/Secretary is there but in the said receipt, there is no mention of any particular of any land, therefore, it cannot be connected with the property in dispute. On 2 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1641/2008 Gopa Ram. vs. Kan Singh & Ors. these prima-facie findings, obviously finding of possession, the trial court refused to grant injunction. Learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff submitted that the appellant was in possession of the land in question and he applied for grant of patta. The patta was not issued in favour of the appellant merely on the ground that the land is gochar land. Taking benefit of the situation, the defendants got the sale deed executed from the person who himself had no title and encroached upon the plaintiff's plot. Therefore, the plaintiff filed the suit for possession. It is submitted that during pendency of the suit, if injunction will be refused, the defendants will raise construction over the property which is gochar land which was in possession of the plaintiff. It is submitted that no equity is in favour of the defendants and in either case, whether it is the plaintiff's land or gochar land, the defendants cannot raise any construction. Learned counsel for the respondents/defendants submitted that they purchased the property in 3 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1641/2008 Gopa Ram. vs. Kan Singh & Ors. question and are in possession of the property. The plaintiff wrongly set up the plea that for this very land, he sought patta from Gram Panchayat. The trial court rightly held that the receipts cannot be connected with the property in dispute. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the facts of the case. It is clearly from the facts which substantially are not disputed that the respondent is in possession of the property and the suit has been filed by the plaintiff and the plaintiff admittedly has no title to the property, therefore, this appeal is disposed of with a condition that if the respondents will raise any construction, then they shall not claim any equity in their favour because of raising construction by them and further they shall remove the construction in case, the plaintiff succeeds in the suit. The respondents shall submit an undertaking before the trial Court that whatever construction they will raise, that will be subject 4 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1641/2008 Gopa Ram. vs. Kan Singh & Ors. to the decision of the suit and they will not be entitled to any equity in their favour because of the construction and further that they will not sell the property during the pendency of the suit. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya