DHARAMPAL Vs. PALE RAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the Courts below duly recapitulated and described the factual matrix of pleadings and evidence brought on record by the parties in detail, therefore, there appears to be no necessity to again reproduce and repeat the same in this regular second appeal. However, the compendium of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the present appeal and emanating from the record, is that a large chunk of the land, including the land in dispute, was owned by the Proprietors/Khewatdars/Mushtarka Malkan of village Kakroi, Tehsil and District Sonepat. Om Parkash son of Kidara (proforma respondent No.5-defendant No. 1), earlier instituted the civil suit bearing No. 188 of 1984 titled as Om Parkash v. Dharambir, with respect of the entire land of the Proprietors/Mushtarka Malkan of the village. The suit was decreed on the basis of admission of Dharambir son of Sube by the trial Court by means of judgment and decree dated 07.03.1984 (Ex.P-5).

(2.) In order to further conceal their collusion, the said judgment and decree was stated to have been secretly challenged in another civil suit bearing No.922/929 of 1985, purporting to have been filed by Raj Singh son of Jai Lal and others-respondent Nos.6 to 8-defendant Nos.3 to 5), which was dismissed by the civil court, by virtue of judgment and decree dated 31.07.1986 (Ex.P-7).

(3.) Likewise, Om Parkash-defendant No.1 was stated to have suffered another consent decree dated 14.05.2004 passed in Civil Suit No.374 of 2003 in respect of suit land in favour of Dharam Pal son of Sube Singh-appellant defendant No.6 during the pendency of the present suit.