Punjab & Haryana HC: Mere Stacking of Cow Dung Cakes Not Proof of Possession, Injunction Suit Dismissed

Case Name: Gulzar Singh (through LRs) v. Raghbir Singh & Ors.
Date of Judgment: January 13, 2020
Citation: RSA No. 1131 of 1999 (O&M)
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh

Held: The High Court dismissed the Regular Second Appeal filed by the plaintiff, upholding the lower appellate court’s decision that had set aside the trial court decree of permanent injunction. It was held that the burden to prove possession lay on the plaintiff, and mere stacking of cow dung cakes, fodder, or manure heaps did not constitute legal or exclusive possession of the land. The Court emphasized that pleadings must provide specific details of possession, which were absent in this case, and that a Local Commissioner’s report, especially when made without notice to the opposite party, could not by itself establish possession. Relying on settled principles that a plaintiff must prove his own case independent of weaknesses in the defendant’s case, the Court found no infirmity in the lower appellate court’s findings.

Summary: The plaintiff claimed ownership and possession of a vacant plot in village Tangari, District Ropar, alleging that he had been using it to store cow dung cakes and fodder for many years. He sought a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering. The trial court decreed the suit, but the first appellate court reversed the decree, holding that the plaintiff had not proved possession. On appeal, the plaintiff relied heavily on the Local Commissioner’s report, which allegedly supported his claim. The High Court, however, noted that the report carried little evidentiary value since the defendants were not associated during inspection. It further observed that the plaintiff admitted having no documentary proof of ownership or possession, and oral testimonies from his witnesses were vague. The Court cited precedents such as Padam Sen v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1961) and T.K. Krishnamurthy v. Tamil Nadu Water and Drainage Board (2006) to reiterate that courts are not meant to collect evidence for parties, and that commission reports cannot substitute proof by the litigant.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove possession and that mere storing of manure or cow dung on vacant land was insufficient to establish rights. The injunction claim was rejected, and the findings of the lower appellate court were affirmed.