BADDAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI), ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole question which arises for determination in this revision petition is as to whether the Civil Courts have jurisdiction to decide the dispute between the parties which relates to land claimed by the Custodian of Evacuee Property, East Punjab, Jullundur (Respondent No. 2) to be "acquired evacuee property."

(2.) THE suit giving rise to this petition was filed by the Petitioner Baddan on these allegations. The land in dispute was originally mortgaged by the predecessors -in -interest of four persons named Sardara, Dinu, Budh Singh and Chokhe in favour of Bihari, grandfather of Defendants Nos. 5 to 8, who created a sub -mortgage in favour of Defendants Nos. 9 to 22 who, in turn, sold their rights to the Plaintiff. The mortgage and the sub -mortgage were both usufructuary and were created "long before 1890". Ever since their creation the Plaintiff and his predecessors -in -interest had been in possession of the land of which the Plaintiff became the full owner by efflux of time after the expiry of the period of 60 years reckoned from the said creation, as the mortgage was never redeemed. The Union of India, the Custodian of Evacuee Property and the Tahsildar (Sales), Gurgaon, Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 respectively, were wrongly treating the land as evacuee property and were going to sell it by auction, although they had No. right at all with regard to it.

(3.) THE suit was resisted by Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and 9. The written statement of Defendant No. 9 contained a simple denial of the allegations made in the plaint without stating as to what the real facts according to him were. The only specific plea raised by him was that the jurisdiction of the civil Courts was barred by the provisions of Section 46 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act (hereinafter referred to as the Evacuee ).