JOGINDER KAUR ALIAS JOGINDERO Vs. MEHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1808 (for brevity "the Code") is directed against the order dated 17.5.1995 passed by the Sub Judge 2nd Class, Amritsar dismissing the application filed by the defendant-petitioner in which a preliminary objection was raised that the Civil Suit No. 964 of 1994 instituted on 14.10.1994 (for brevity "the present suit") is barred by the principles of resjudicata as envisaged by Section 11 and Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code.

(2.) FACTS necessary for deciding the legal controversy raised in the present revision petition are that on an earlier occasion defendant-petitioner had filed Civil Suit No. 568/82/84 instituted on 3.9.1982/23.8.1984 (for brevity 'the previous suit') decided on 1.6.1985 to which plaintiff-respondent was a party. The suit was decreed on 1.6.1985 after the plaintiff-respondent was proceeded ex-parte. It was further averred that against the judgment and decree dated 1.6.1985 an appeal was filed by the defendant-petitioner being C.A. No. 146 of 1986 for modifying the judgment and decree. A declaration was given in favour of the defendant-petitioner that she was owner in possession of 37/96th share in the land measuring 289 kanals 10 marlas to the exclusion of four persons namely Mohindero, Veero, Guro daughters of Bela Singh and Jito d/o Piaro d/o Bela Singh. It is pertinent to mention that Mohindro, Veero, Guro and Piaro were real sisters of the defendant-petitioner. The defendant- petitioner was given the consequential relief of restraining them from interfering in her lawful possession.

(3.) PLAINTIFF -respondents has filed the present suit under Section 45 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 to the effect that record of rights i.e. Jamabandi for the year 1986-87 had been wrongly prepared and was liable to be corrected by incorporating that plaintiff-respondent along with Wasakha Singh, Hazura Singh and Shangara Singh were the owner and co-sharer in possession of the suit land to the extent of 1/3rd share and defendant-petitioner is also owner to the extent of 1/3rd share. It was further claimed that three other persons namely Baj Singh, Karaj Singh and Surain Singh were owner and co- sharer to the extent of 1/3rd share of the land measuring 289 kanals 10 marlas. The consequential relief of permanent injunction of staying the partition proceedings which were pending before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Amritsar filed by the defendant-petitioner was also sought till the final decision of the present suit. It was in this suit that defendant- petitioner raised objection that when she filed previous suit, the plaintiff- respondent was a party, albeit proforma, yet he was bound by the decree and therefore the suit filed by him was barred by the principles of res judicata. In order to appreciate the factual matrix it would be appropriate to make a reference to the pedigree table which is as under :