KARAN SINGH Vs. RACHHPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This R.S.A. has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.10.1999 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur who, affirmed the order dated 3.8.1996 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gurdaspur who allowed the application of respondent No. 1 for passing the final decree.

(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner : Shri Rachhpal Singh, respondent No. l filed an application for the framing of final decree of possession by redemption of the land measuring 66 kanals 14 marlas fully described in the head note of the application, Situated in the revenue estate of village Bhatoa, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur and it was inter alia pleaded in the application by the decree -holder that he filed a civil suit No. 3l of 1971 in which a preliminary decree was passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur on 15.3.1986. It is further averred that earlier he filed a suit which was dismissed by the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur on 30.12.1982. He filed an appeal against the judgment and decree of the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur and his appeal was allowed on 15.3.1986 and decree for possession by way of redemption of the suit land on payment of Rs. 5,638.40 was passed against the judgment -debtors. The present appellants filed an appeal in the Hon'ble High Court which was also dismissed on 10.11.1986. Since the preliminary decree had become final, therefore, respondent No. l made a prayer that the decree be affirmed and final decree be prepared and on the basis of the final decree he may be given the possession.

(3.) Notice of the application was given to the respondent (now appellants) who filed the reply and denied the allegations. According to the respondent -appellants, the application was not legally maintainable as the preliminary decree was passed with respect of the land measuring 66 kanals 14 marlas whereas the total land mortgaged was 111 kanals 14 marlas as per jamabandi for the year 1962 -63 and in these circumstances, the preliminary decree passed by the Court of Additional District Judge cannot be enforced. Moreover, the same has been obtained by fraud after tendering bogus documents with forged seals of Government of Pakistan. With these prayer the respondents now appellants prayed for the dismissal of the application.