Regular Civil Suit No.005/2002

MR. RANJAN OBEROI,
S/o of MR. KIRAN OBEROI,
Major, single, in business,
Resident of B-6,’Chason’,
Panaji- Goa......................... Plaintiff

V/S

MR. PRATIK JAIN,
S/o of MR. SHIV JAIN,
Major, single, in service,
Resident of Alfred Apts.,
Panaji- Goa. .........................Defendant

SUIT FOR INJUCTION AND CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF

The plaintiff above named states and submits as under:
1) The registered address of the plaintiff for the plaintiff for all future communications as required under Order 6 Rule 14 A is the same as is mentioned in the cause title.

2) The plaintiff is the owner in possession of an immovable property denominated as ‘MOROD’ Situated in Taleigao, Tiswadi taluka, Panaji- Goa, and registered in Land Registration Office under No.777/1965 in Book I Vol.III pgs.72-98. This property is bounded on the east by the water drain, on the west by the property of MR. AUGUSTINO FERNANDES, on the north by the property of MR. PRATIK JAIN, on the south by the main road. This property shall hereinafter be referred to as suit property.

3) The suit property was purchased by the plaintiff by a sale deed dated 5/7/94, which is registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar at Panaji-Goa under No.120 A at pages 105-118 of Book I Vol.8 on 20/7/94. Hereto annexed and marked ‘Exhibit A’ is the copy of the sale deed.

4) From the time of purchasing the suit property, the plaintiff has been in continuous unobstructed and quiet possession of the suit property and his name is recorded in occupant column of ‘Form B’of the city survey record. Hereto annexed and marked ‘Exhibit B’ is the copy of the said ‘form B’.

5) The defendant is in possession of the property known as ‘SAROA’ which adjoins the suit property on the western side. These 2 properties are separated from each other by a boundary line as is shown in sketch by line AB. Hereto annexed and marked ‘Exhibit C’ is the sketch.

6) The defendant used to exercise possessive rights within the said property known as ‘SAROA’ upto the boundary AB and never occupied possession of land or any portion beyond.

7) However during the last 2 months, the defendant has been raising an unwarranted dispute and trying to claim some part of suit property. The plaintiff very often requested the defendant to settle the dispute in an amicable manner by observing the documents. However the defendant avoided any such co-operation.

8) Some days back, the defendant collected some construction material within the property probably with an intention of encroaching in the suit property.

9) Considering that 26th, 27th, and 28th are holidays, being Republic Day, Saturday and Sunday respectively, the defendant brought an Engineer on 25th January, Thursday, at 4 p.m. and demarcated a part for construction of a compound wall and this demarcation has extended within the western boundary of suit property to an extent of 50 sq.mts. i.e. 10x5 mts. as shown in red color in the sketch under ‘Exhibit C’.

10) Having marked the location for compound wall, the defendant, taking advantage of the holidays in succession has employed about 15 laborers to carry out construction work speedily and on the instructions of the defendant the work is being carried out at full speed.

11) The plaintiff states that the defendant without any cause, right, title or interest has trespassed into the suit property to the extent mentioned above. The above said act is in violation of the plaintiff’s right and is therefore illegal.

12) The defendant has by now constructed the compound the compound wall, within the suit property, having a height of about 1-2 mts. above the ground level.

13) The plaintiff submits that he is entitled to a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to demolish the compound wall already constructed and to restore the ground to the original position and also for a restrictive injunction permanently restraining the defendant from interfering with the suit property in whatsoever manner.

14) The plaintiff submits that pending the hearing and the final disposal of the suit, the plaintiff is entitled to interim order restraining the defendant and his agents in the property.

15) For the purpose of court fees and jurisdiction relief (a) and (b) are together valued at Rs.10, 000/-.

16) The suit property is situated at Taleigao, Panaji within the jurisdiction of this Court. This Hon’ble Court has therefore the jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit. The cause of action for the present suit arose on 25th January when the defendant entered into the suit property for the first time. The suit is therefore not barred by limitation.

17) The plaintiff prays that:
a) for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant or any person claiming under him from interfering with the suit property in whatsoever manner.
b) for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to demolish the portion of the compound wall constructed within the suit property and to restore the suit property to the original condition.
c) pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, an interim order restraining the defendant and his agent from interfering with the suit property in any manner whatsoever.

PLACE: Panaji- Goa
DATE: 25th February 2002

Sd/-
PLAINT DRAWN BY PLAINTIFF

Sd/-[ADV.FOR PLAINTIFF]

VERIFICATION

I, MR. RANJAN OBEROI, the plaintiff above named state on oath that the contents of the paragraphs 1 to 13 are true to my knowledge and contents of paragraphs 14 to 17 are legal submissions and I believe the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Panaji, Goa on this 15th day of February 2002.

Sd/-
PLAINTIFF