GRAM PANCHAYAT DEHLWAS Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of RSA No.3390 of 2006 which has been filed by the Gram Panchayat through one of its Panches as also RSA No.1480 of 2006 which has been filed by the same Gram Panchayat albeit through the BDPO. Since they both arise out of the common judgment, they are being disposed of together by this common order. The facts are being taken from RSA No.3390 of 2006.

(2.) The respondent had filed the present suit claiming that earlier his father Badlu had obtained a decree from the Court of Assistant Collector 1st Grade under the provisions of the Punjab Village and Common Lands Act whereby a declaration had been issued that said Badlu was owner in possession of the land in dispute and further that the land in dispute was not part of Shamilat deh and that the appellant Gram Panchayat had no right, title or interest in the said land and further that the said judgement and decree had become final. This seminal fact has not been disputed. The following questions have been proposed in RSA No.3390 of 2006:-

(3.) As regards the question of limitation, in my opinion, the same does not arise. Once the respondent is held to be owner in possession of land in dispute on the basis of inheritance, it cannot be said that he derives title only from the judgment and decree (Ex.PA) in favour of his father . Thus the suit cannot be held to be outside limitation.