BAIJ NATH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Jaswal at the very start states that Baij Nath and Sheo Singh petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 respectively have already died, whereas Sadhu Singh petitioner No. 2 is alive and he is pursuing the present petition in his representative capacity.

(2.) SHEO Singh (since deceased) along with one Tejpal Singh had filed a suit in their individual capacity and also on behalf of all the proprietors under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC against respondent No. 5 Gram Panchayat Kalsana, tehsil Thanesar, district Kurukshetra on 24.8.1954 for permanent injunction, asserting therein that some land (suit land) had become shamlat deh due to river action and the plaintiffs, who were the land owners in the village and were in possession of the same, were apprehending that the Gram Panchayat would interfere with their possession over the said land, for which it should be restrained.

(3.) THE main issues inter alia framed by the Court were as to whether the land in dispute has become shamlat due to river action and therefore the provision of Punjab Act 1 of 1954 do not apply to the same ? and whether the civil Court has the jurisdiction to try the suit or not ?