GURBACHAN SINGH Vs. PURAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by

(2.) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and order of the High court of the Punjab reversing in second appeal the decree of the District court and thus dismissing the plaintiffs suit for declaration. In order to understand the question in controversy it is necessary to set out the following pedigree: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_1263_AIR(SC)_1961Image1.jpg</IMG>

(3.) IN order to come to this conclusion the learned District Judge in an elaborate judgment has traced the history of each Khasura number and decreed only those Khasras which were held by Himmat Singh. The High court did not accept this finding but, in our opinion, the High court was in error in interfering with that finding. At the first regular settlement the land decreed was held by Himmat Singh and the revenue pedigree shows that in 1885 the three branches descending from Himmat Singh, i.e., Gulab Singh who was alive, sons of Mehtab Singh and Leekar son of Fattu held khewat Nos. 34, 35 and 36 which were equal in area and each branch was paying land revenue of Rs. 13.00. The excerpt Ex. P. W. 6/1 prepared by the Kanungo further shows that the land held by the sons of Mehtab Singh, i. e., Khata No. 34 was held by them jointly and in equal shares. On these facts the finding in regard to the land decreed was held to be ancestral.