INDAR SINGH Vs. GULZARA SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are six appeals directed against three judgments and decrees of the learned Additional District Judge of Ludhiana whereby he varied the decrees passed by the trial Court in Suits Nos. 528, 529 and 531 of 1943. The facts of the case are not very simple and may be stated at some length. The vendors and the Plaintiff are related in the following manner:

(2.) GULZARA Singh, a collateral who claims to be a minor, brought three suits. Suit No. 528 was to challenge the sale in favour of Indar Singh. Suit No. 529 was to challenge the sale in favour of Chanan Singh. Suit No. 581 was to challenge the sale in favour of Bhag Singh. In all these suits the vendees pleaded that the land was not ancestral. In Suits Nos. 528 and 529 the plaint was allowed to be amended and instead of challenging the sale by Major Singh to Chanan Singh and Indar Singh the original sale of Dhanna Singh of 29 -12 -1933 was challenged by Gulzara Singh. A large number of pleas were raised by the Defendants and an equally large number of issues were stated by the learned trial Judge, but he found that the whole of the land sold was non -ancestral as also the half house which was comprised in Suit No. 528 and, therefore, he dismissed the suit. Appeals against those decrees were taken to the learned District Judge, who by his judgment dated 8 -7 -1948 has hold (1) that half the house was rightly held to be non -ancestral (2) he divided the land into four categories (a) 24 fields mentioned on pages 120 and 121 in the settlement records of 1852 which were recorded to be the property of Kahan son of Nanak, (b) 15 fields recorded in that settlement in the name of third parties, (c) 21 fields entered at page 124 of the settlement record of 1852 stood in the name of Mehru, (d) shamilat land. There did not seem to be any dispute with regard to category (b). With regard to (a) he held that the land had been proved to be ancestral, and (c) he held to be non -ancestral, and the shamilat would follow the Khewat land. Against these three judgments and decrees these appeals have been filed, three by the vendees and three by Gulzara Singh, and this judgment will dispose of all the six appeals. With regard to -category No. (c), i.e., land which had come from Mohru, it appears that Khazan Singh, the grand -father gifted this portion in the proportion of one -third to Dewa Singh and the rest to the other sons. Hazara Singh, who was the son of Attar Singh, sold his one -third share to Hira Singh and Wazir Singh. He held the whole of this land to be non -ancestral on the ground that the property had not come by inheritance to the sons of Khazan Singh and had come otherwise than by descent or by reason merely of their connexion with the common ancestor.

(3.) IN the result I allow the appeals filed by the vendees and dismiss the appeals filed by Gulzara Singh, the collateral. As a result all the suits are dismissed. The vendees will have their costs in this Court as well as in the Courts below.