[2025:RJ-JP:28855] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 265/2022 Jagram S/o Shri Bhagwan Sahai, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Gram Kankarchhaja, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar (Raj.). ----Appellant Versus Gram Panchayat Gunti, Panchayat Samiti Behror, Tehsil Behror, District Alwar (Raj.) Through Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Gunti. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Brahma Prakash For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment 30/07/2025 The civil second appeal has been filed by the appellant- plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) against the judgment and decree dated 07.07.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1, Behror, District Alwar (for short ‘the first appellate Court’) in appeal No. 18/2017 whereby the first appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, No.1, Behror, District Alwar in civil suit No. 180/2015 (119/2014) by which the plaintiff’s suit has been dismissed. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, mandatory and permanent injunction and for compensation against the respondent-defendant (for short ‘the defendant’) mentioning therein that the ancestors of the plaintiff had constructed a Chabutara which is marked as ‘ABCD’ in the [2025:RJ-JP:28855] (2 of 3) [CSA-265/2022] map annexed with the suit. Chabutara is a part of the property of the plaintiff, he was enjoying the said Chabutara since long. There is a drainage system constructed on the south side of the Chabutara for the water disposal in the tenure of earlier constituted Gram Panchayat. Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Gunti had enmity with the plaintiff and wanted to demolish the Chabutara and evict the plaintiff, so, it was prayed that defendant be restrained to demolish the Chabutara. Defendant had not filed the written statement. To prove his case, plaintiff got himself examined as PW-1- Jagram, got examined PW-2 Puran Chand, PW-3 Giriraj, PW-4 Bastiram, PW-5 Banwari and got exhibited certain documents. The defendant had not adduced any evidence. After hearing the parties, the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 21.08.2017, dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff. Plaintiff challenged the said judgment and decree dated 21.08.2017 passed by the trial Court by filing an appeal and the first appellate Court vide judgment dated 07.07.2022 dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the trial Court as well as the first appellate court have committed an error in dismissing the suit as well as the appeal filed by the plaintiff. Defendant had not filed the written statement, so, the evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained un-rebutted. It is an admitted position that the Chabutara was constructed by the ancestors of the plaintiff. So, the judgments passed by both the courts below be set aside and the present second appeal be admitted on the substantial questions of law, as framed in the memo of appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:28855] (3 of 3) [CSA-265/2022] No one has put in appearance for the defendant. I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the plaintiff and perused the impugned judgments. It is an admitted position that the disputed Chabutara is not in the ownership of the plaintiff. It was made on the public land. Plaintiff is an encroacher on the said land. So, in my considered opinion, the trial Court as well as the first appellate court have not committed any error in dismissing the suit as also the appeal filed by the plaintiff. So, no substantial questions of law is made out in the appeal. Therefore, the present appeal being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu/87