MEGH SINGH Vs. HOSHIAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts to this second appeal are that Khasra No. 255/151 measuring 21 Bighas, in addition to other land, was owned by two parties :-

(2.) Except defendants Gopal Singh and Jagan Nath, the remaining defendants contested the suit. According to them, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 had already sold more than their share in the joint Khata. These defendants also took up some other pleas as will be clear from the following issues framed by the learned trial Court :-

(3.) Under issue No. 1 it was held that the plaintiff was the owner of the land comprised in Khasra No. 369/255/2 measuring 6 Bighas 2 Biswas as out of the land possessed by Tara Chand, the above land was allotted to his vendors Gopal Singh and Jagan Nath. Under issue Nos. 2 and 3 it was held that the partition effected by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade was perfectly valid and Tara Chand was rightly dispossessed of Khasra No. 369/255/1 in those proceedings. Under issue No. 4 it was held that the suit was within limitation. As a result of the above findings, the plaintiff's suit with respect to Khasra No. 369/255/2 was decreed and with respect to the remaining land it was dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, legal representatives of Tara Chand filed as appeal which was heared by learned Senior Subordinate Judge (with Enhanced Appellant Powers), Bhiwani. After calculating the various alienations of land effected by the vendors of Tara Chand plaintiff, the Court held that on 18th May, 1957, on which date they had executed the sale deed in his (i.e. Tara Charles') favour, they had still 15 Bighas 3 Biswas in the joint Khata and that land could be validly transferred to him. He further held that it was the fault of Revenue Department that the entries in the revenue papers were not incorporated after the mutation was sanctioned in favour of Tara Chand on 24th November, 1962. Accordingly, he confirmed the decree of the learned trial Court about the grant of symbolical possession in respect of 6 Bighas 2 Biswas of land comprised in Khasra No. 369/255/2 and also passed a decree for actual possession of 8 Bighas 1 Biswas of land comprised in Khasra No. 369/255/1. He dismissed the suit of the plaintiff regarding 13 Biswas of land comprised in the latter Khasra number. The contesting defendants have come to this Court in appeal.