DALBIR KAUR Vs. JAGBIR KAUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of two revision petitions, namely Civil Revision Nos. 5860 of 1999 and 6210 of 1999 because both the revisions have arisen from the orders dated 14.10.1999 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ajnala in the civil suit No. 75 of 4.3.199. The subject matter of challenge in Civil Revision No. 5860 of 1999 is the order passed on an application filed by the plaintiff respondents under Order 23 Rule 3 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity, 'the Code') seeking amendment of the plaint. The prayer of the plaintiff -respondents to withdraw the suit was allowed and permission has also been given to her to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. The second order which is subject matter of challenge in the other revision has dismissed the application filed by the defendant -petitioner under Order 14 Rule 2 of the Code for deciding the issue concerning res judicata.

(2.) THE facts discernible from the record of this case are as follows: -

(3.) ON 26.2.1997, plaintiff -respondents Jagir Kaur and Karamjit Kaur widow and daughter of Sarabjit Sigh respectively instituted a civil suit bearing No. 65 of 1997 for declaration that they were owners in possession of the land measuring 73 kanals 3 marlas fully described in the plaint. The basis of their assertion was that the part of the land was inherited by their husband and father from Gurbachan Singh on the basis of Will dated 10.4.1986 and the remaining land was self -acquired property of the deceased Sarabjit Sigh, It was further asserted that the defendant -petitioner has no right to alienate or dispose of the Sand in any manner. On 25.3.1998, during the pendency of the suit, parties entered into a compromise whereby it was agreed that out of 41 kanals 9 marlas of land inherited from Gwbachan Singh. Dalbir Kaur the widow of Gurbachan Singh would be owner of 20 kanals 14.5 niariss and remaining, land would be owned by Jagir Kaur and Karamjit Kaur widow and daughter respectively of Sarabjit Singh. It was further agreed between the parties that the suit would be got decided in terms of the compromise and accordingly statement of Karamjit Kaur the defendant plaintiff -respondent No. 1 was recorded on 20.4F.1998 and she stated thai the Will allegedly executed by Gurbachan Singh was illegal and forged document and that she has compromised with the defendant -petitioner. The trial Court instead of deciding the suit on the basis of compromise dismissed the suit as well as the counter claim on merit vide its judgment and decree dated 20.4.1998. Copy of the compromise dated 25.3.1998, statement of 'Karamjit Kaur daughter plaintiff -respondent No. 2 dated 20.4.1998 and judgment and decree dated 20.4.1998 have also been placed on record.