MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is plaintiff's Regular Second Appeal filed against the judgment and decree of Additional District Judge, Barnala, dated June 12, 1990, whereby appeal filed by Punjab State and another against the judgment and decree passed by Sub Judge 1st Class. Barnala, dated November 25, 1986. was allowed and the suit filed by Mukhtiar Singh and other, plaintiffs, was dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiffs, Mukhtiar Singh and others, filed the suit for declaration that they were owners in possession of the suit land measuring 86 Kanals 11 marlas, situated in Patti Bir Singh Bhadaur and for grant of permanent injunction restraining Punjab State and the Collector of District Sangrur from interfering in their possession. The land was earlier owned by ancestors of plaintiffs namely Sawn Singh, Rulia Singh and others. They had mortgaged the same for Rs. 462 -8 Annas in favour of Basant Kaur. Thereafter Basant Kaur continued in possession of the same. The receipt of payment of the aforesaid amount was thumbmarked by Basant Kaur, the mortgagee, and was attested by Prem Singh. However, the entry in the revenue records continued in the name of Basant Kaur, Subsequently the entry was changed in the name of the provincial government as mortgagee. The plaintiffs and their ancestors continued in possession of the suit land for more than 40 years. Basant Kaur had been seeing their possession. The plaintiffs did not pay and Chakota pr Batai and as such they became owners of the suit land by way of adverse possession. Taking advantage of the wrong entry made in the revenue records in the name of the provincial government, the defendants wanted to forcibly interfere with possession of the plaintiffs, which led the plaintiffs to file the suit.

(3.) Contesting the suit, the defendants broadly admitted the factum of mortgage but denied its redemption. The receipt alleged by the plaintiffs, was stated to be wrongly prepared. The name of the provincial government was entered on January 22, 1951, in the revenue records when mutation was sanctioned. The plaintiffs were not in possession of the suit land as owners but their possession was illegal. In 1985 proceedings were taken for leasing out the land. After the death of Basant Kaur the land was mutated in the name of provincial government.