HIRA SINGH Vs. SAHINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular second appeal under S. 100 of the Civil P.C. seeks the setting aside of the judgment and decree of the Courts below and for dismissal of the suit of respondent No. 1 against the appellant.

(2.) The dispute relates to Khasra No. 932, 2 bighas 11 biswas in village Madipur, Delhi. Land measuring 2632 bighas 18 biswas and situate in village Madipur was notified for acquisition under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide notification dt. Nov. 13, 1959 along with other land. A declaration under S. 6 of the said Act was issued on June 10, 1963 with respect to the land in village Madipur including the land of Khasra No. 932. Notices under Ss. 9 and 10 were issued to all the persons interested in the land under acquisition inviting claims for compensation. They were considered by the Land Acquisition Collector and award No. 1691 dt. Mar. 23, 1964 was announced. In the meanwhile, Shri Surat Singh filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the declaration of bhumidari rights in respect of khasra No. 932 in favour of Fateh Singh is wrong, illegal, without jurisdiction and void. That suit was decreed by Shri K. L. Wason, SubJudge, Delhi on June 15, 1960 and Shri Surat Singh was held entitled to be declared bhumidar under S. 1 l(l)(a) of the Delhi Land Reforms Act. Shri Hira Singh also filed a suit against Fateh Singh for a declaration and obtained a decree on Jan. 25, 1964 in suit No. 33/64 from the Court of Shri K. D. Mohan, Sub-Judge, Delhi to the effect that he was entitled to be declared as a bhumidar with respect to khasra No. 932. Hira Singh got mutation No. 1205 in his favour on May 7, 1964 and received the payment of Rs. 4,398.75 on account of compensation of khasra No. 932 along with solatium at the rate of 15% from the Court of Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi sometime in the month of June, 1964.

(3.) Shri Surat Singh brought a suit for the recovery of Rs. 5,000.00 with costs of the suit against Hira Singh and Fateh Singh. It is claimed that Surat Singh is the bhumidar of khasra No. 932 and was entitled to receive compensation which was received by Hira Singh fraudulently, illegally and, therefore, he is liable to refund the same. It is also pleaded that Hira Singh had no right, title or interest in khasra No. 932 and he was neither in possession in the relevant period of 1953- 54 nor was he entitled to bhumidari rights.