CHAJJU RAM Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR, PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of two petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 7674 and 7675 of 1991 since parties are same and common questions of facts and law are involved in both the petitions. The Gram Panchayat, Hamjheri -respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') for ejectment of the petitioner from the land, detail of which is given is given in the headnote of the petition, on the ground that the land vested in the Gram Panchayat and it was so recorded in the revenue record and the petitioner was a lessee. The plea taken by the said petitioner was that he was in continuous possession since 26.01.1950 and the land was never used for common purposes. The petitioner also filed an application under Section 11 of the Act claiming that he was in cultivating possession before 26.01.1950 and staking title. It was pleaded that his father -in -law -Babu Ram was in possession of the land in dispute and by virtue of being in adverse possession, the applicant had become the owner of the land in dispute. The title in the land had been perfected and the Gram Panchayat had notice of the adverse possession, which was never disturbed or disputed. The said claim of title was opposed by the Gram Panchayat. The Collector, Patiala dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 11 of the Act wherein, title had been claimed on 31.01.1989, however, vide order of same date in the ejectment proceedings under Section 7 of the Act, it was held that the petitioner was liable to be evicted from 48 kanals and 1 marla of land only as the possession was illegal and the Gram Panchayat would be at liberty to file a case after getting the title decided.

(2.) RESULTANTLY , the petitioner filed two appeals, one against the order passed by the Collector dismissing his claim regarding title and another against the ejectment ordered from 48 kanals and 1 marla of land. The Commissioner, vide order dated 21.12.1990, dismissed both the appeals and further ordered eviction of the petitioner from the entire land as detailed in para No. 2 of his order. Resultantly, the present writ petitions came to be filed and stay of dispossession was ordered when they were admitted vide order dated 27.05.1991.

(3.) COUNSEL for the Gram Panchayat -respondent No. 3, on the other hand, submitted that the burden of proof lay upon the petitioner since he was claiming title. As per the pleadings, on the basis of which, application had been filed under Section 11 of the Act, the title of the Gram Panchayat stood admitted, since the claim was based on adverse possession. It was submitted that as per the Jamabandi for the year 1950 -51 (Annexure P -5), the land in question was Gair Mumkin Abadi and thus, there was no cultivating possession. The name of the petitioner did not even figure in the cultivating possession and, therefore, he could not claim any benefit of adverse possession on the strength of Section 4(3)(ii) of the Act. There was no resolution of allotment in the favour of the petitioner and the land was depicted as Nagar Panchayat as per Jamabandi for the year 1958 -59 and Khatauni Ishtemal and Khatauni Pamaish had not been brought on record to show that the petitioner was entitled to claim title. The land had been leased out and, therefore, under Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the petitioner was deprived from claiming title.