MAHENDER SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT may be noted at the outset that no paper book has been filed by either of the appellants in the present appeals. However, counsel for the appellants in rfa 260/1982 hands over a paper book in the Court, with a copy to the other side, which is taken on the record. It is agreed by all the parties that the said paper book shall be referred to and relied upon by the parties for hearing both the present appeals.

(2.) CURTAINS are sought to be drawn by this common judgment, on a painfully prolonged litigation between the parties spanning a period of over five decades. The case of respondent No. 1 (plaintiff in the trial court), as set out in the plaint was that he purchased land measuring 1100 square yards out of khewat No. 78 according to the Jamabandi of 1947-48 in village Seelampur, abadi gandhi Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the said land), for a sale consideration of Rs. 6,500/- by virtue of a sale deed dated 10. 02. 1954, registered on 11. 02. 1954. In the year 1957, the respondent No. 1/plaintiff instituted a suit for partition of the said land (registered as Suit No. 518/57) claiming inter alia separation of his share in the land and mesne profit from the appellants herein and some other co- defendants, who were in possession of the entire land, in addition to payment of compensation. The trial court dismissed the aforesaid suit of respondent No. 1/plaintiff as not maintainable, vide judgment dated 28. 12. 1960. Aggrieved by the aforesaid dismissal order, respondent No. 1/plaintiff preferred an appeal in this Court, registered as RFA35-D/1961 entitled "jaswant Singh Vs. Santokh Singh and Ors. ", which was decided by the Division bench vide judgment dated 19. 08. 1971. While setting aside the judgment of the trial court, a preliminary decree was passed by the Division Bench in favour of respondent No. 1, for partition of the suit land.

(3.) BY the aforesaid preliminary decree passed in favour of respondent No. 1/plaintiff (appellant in the aforesaid appeal), the Division Bench held that he was entitled to 36 shares out of 124 shares and it was directed that he be given separate possession of the land falling to his share. The matter was remanded back to the trial court for taking further steps for separating the 36 shares of respondent No. 1/plaintiff in the aforesaid lands and for passing of a final decree. It is undisputed that the aforesaid preliminary decree dated 19. 08. 1971 passed in RFA 35-D/1961 was not challenged by any of the parties to the litigation and the same thus attained finality.