RULIA Vs. JAGDISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CROSS appeals, R. S. A. Nos. 55 and 157 of 1963 have been filed against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court under the following circumstances:-

(2.) SHRI Jagdish Ram who is the appellant in R. S. A. No. 157 of 1963 and the contesting respondent in R. S. A. No. 55 of 1963 had filed this suit for the usual declaration under Customary Law that seven alienations of ancestral land made by his father Shri Telu Ram, during the years 1952 to 1958 were without consideration and necessity and would not affect his reversionary rights after the life time of the alienor. The persons in whose favour these alienations had been made were impleaded as defendants along with Telu Ram alienor. The trial Court found that the entire land which was the subject matter of these seven alienations was ancestral qua the plaintiff and this finding was not challenged either in the lower appellate Court or before me. The suit with regard to the first alienation dated 14-8-1952, which was a mortgage for Rs. 2000/- in favour of Kartara and pritam sons of Mangal Singh defendant was dismissed on the ground that it was time barred and no appeal had been filed against the dismissal of the suit so far as this alienation was concerned even though for reasons to be mentioned further on in this judgment this ground for treating the alienation as sacrosanct was not correct. A mortgage dated 28-1-1954 for a sum of Rs. 2535/- in favour of Atma singh appellant No. 2 in R. S. A. No. 55 of 1963 was set aside by the trial Court as it was not proved to be for consideration and necessity. The findings of the trial court with regard to this mortgage were upheld by the lower appellate Court and I have no reasons to disturb these concurrent findings of fact of the Courts below. A sale dated 9-6-1958 for a sum of Rs. 7000/- in favour of appellants Nos. 3 and 4 in R. S. A. No. 55 of 1963 had been set aside by the Courts below subject to the payment of the amount proved to be for necessity. There has been a compromise between the parties with regard to this alienation in this Court. This compromise was recorded by Mittal J. (Jr.) on July 17, 1972 and Jagdish Ram's suit with regard to this alienation has also to be dismissed. The appeal filed by Sarvashri Norata singh and Gian Singh appellants Nos. 3 and 4 (in R. S. A. No. 55 of 1963) has, therefore, to be accepted in terms of the compromise.

(3.) A sale dated 13-2-1957 for a sum of Rs. 2000/- in favour of Chanan Singh and pritam Singh sons of Nihal Singh defendants Nos. 5 and 6 had been set aside by the trial Court but the vendees had not cared to file any appeal and the findings of the trial Court with regard to this alienation have also become final. This leaves us with three sales of land which have been mentioned at serial Nos. (iii) (iv) and (vi)of paragraph 3 of the judgment of the lower appellate Court.