AJMER SINGH Vs. CHANAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of two Regular Second Appeal Nos. 2004 and 2162 of 1982 as both the aforesaid appeals have arisen out of the common judgments and decree of the learned courts below. Whereas regular second appeal No. 2004 of 1982 has been filed by the plaintiffs Ajmer Singh and others challenging the judgment of the learned first appellate Court whereby the suit of the plaintiffs has merely been decreed to the extent of 1/2 share in the suit land, the other regular second appeal No. 2162 of 1982 has been filed by the defendant challenging the aforesaid judgment of the learned first appellate court making a grievance even against decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs to the extent of 1/2 share.

(2.) THE plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of the land measuring 41 kanals 11 marlas. It was claimed by the plaintiffs that Kapur Singh (father of the plaintiffs) and his brother Amdoor Singh had sold the land measuring 16 kanals 8 marlas to Ganga Singh, defendant, vide sale deed April 15, 1941. The said sale deed was registered on April 21, 1941. The usual declaratory suit was filed by the plaintiffs challenging the aforesaid sale deed on the ground that the said land being the ancestral property could not be sold by the aforesaid vendors and, as such it was claimed that the said sale was ineffective qua the reversionary rights of the aforesaid plaintiffs. The said suit was decreed by the learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated November 22, 1945 qua the entire land except khasra No. 4607. The aforesaid judgment is Ex. P-2 whereas the decree passed in the said suit is Ex. P-9 on the record. It was held that the plaintiffs in the aforesaid suit would be entitled to get possession of the said land without payment of sale price after the death of Kapur Singh and Amdoor Singh. The plaintiffs claimed that Amdoor Singh died on August 16, 1974. Father of the plaintiffs, Kapur Singh, died on June 18, 1975. Accordingly, the plaintiffs filed the present suit for possession on January 23, 1976. It was specifically claimed by the plaintiffs that there was no other heir of aforesaid vendors expect the plaintiffs. Since the consolidation proceedings had taken place in the village, therefore, it was pleaded that the suit land mentioned in the plaint was allotted to Ganga Singh in lieu of the land originally sold by the vendors.

(3.) THE learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence available on the record found that the suit land was allotted to Ganga Singh, defendant, during the consolidation proceedings in lieu of the land sold to him by the vendors, Kapur Singh and Amdoor Singh through the sale deed dated April 15, 1941. It was further held that defendant, Ganga Singh, had completely failed to prove that Amdoor Singh had any other heir who had any title or interest to succeed to his estate. The learned trial Court further held that on the passing of the earlier decree the land stood restored to the estate of original vendors Kapur Singh and Amdoor Singh and, therefore, the aforesaid decree dated November 22, 1945 would be for the benefit of all the reversioners and, therefore, plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3 were entitled to get the suit land. It was further held that even after the amending Act, 1973 whereby the Punjab Customs (Powers to Contest) Act, 1920 had been repealed, the earlier decree still remained operative and binding between the parties and, therefore, the plaintiffs had a right to seek the possession. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the suit filed by the plaintiffs was decreed.