SITA DEVI Vs. RAJINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALBIR Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Gurjant Singh, Sukhminder Singh, Besant Singh sons of Hazura Singh, Arjan Singh, Sar-wan Singh and Hazura Singh sons of Ram Singh filed Civil Suit No. 84 of 1960 for a decree of possession by way of partition of 5 bighas-5 biswas, 4 biswas of land comprised in khasra Nos. 2630/2501 (3-18b), 2476/1799 (1-9), 2505/1749 (2-19) 2628/2501 (1-15), Khatauni No. 250, Khewat No. 98, Khasra Nos. 2503/1749 (2-8), 2629/2501 (6-6) 1751/865 (1-3), 1753/865 (1-7), 1754/865 (1-7), 1754/865 (1-7), 1752/865 (1-7), 1750/865 (1-3), 2502/1755/1 (1-15), 2502/1755 (1-19), 2504/1779 (1-15), 2475/1749 (1-0), Khewat No. 98, Khatauni Nos. 253 to 260 as per jamabandi 1955-56 of Malout Mandi. The said suit was dismissed by Sub Judge 1st Class, Muktsar vide judgment and decree dated 16. 1. 1961. It was challenged by the plaintiff. The first appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 30. 4. 1962 reversed the judgment and decree appealed against and a preliminary decree for partition of the land in dispute was passed. The defendants preferred regular second appeal in this court which was dismissed on 31. 7. 1964.

(2.) THE plaintiff-decree holders applied for passing of a final decree. Arjan Singh decree holder died and his sons Rup Singh, Jagraj Singh, daughters namely, Bibbi Jeeta, and Bhagwan Kaur and widow Smt. Nand Kaur were brought on record. Sukhdev Singh plaintiff had also died. Her mother Sham Kaur was, there-fore, brought on record in his stead. Notice of the application was issued to the judgment-debtor, Sub Judge 1st Class, Muktsar, appointed Shri Dault Ram, Pleader, as a Local Commissioner, to effect the partition according to the terms. of the preliminary decree after ascertaining new khasra numbers vide his order dated 8. 1. 1968. Said Local Commissioner inspected the land in dispute a number of times after notifying the parties concerned and ultimately submitted his report dated 27. 5. 1968.

(3.) THE decree holders sued out execution application on 3. 3. 1976. In this execution proceeding judgment-debtors raised objection that the decree was in executable because the same had not been engrossed on requisite stamp paper. The learned Executing Court vide order dated 15. 11. 1980 accepted the objection and held that the decree was in-executable, it having not been engrossed on a stamp paper. However, it was observed that the decree holders were at liberty to supply the requisite stamp paper and the decree would stand revalidated from the date it was passed. The plaintiffs were required to supply the stamp paper according to the market value of their separated share as on 30. 12. 1974. Thereupon the plaintiffs moved application No. 6-6a dated 173. 1981 in the Court of Shri B. C. Rajput, Sub Judge 1st Class, Muktsar for assessing the market value of their separated share i. e. 8 Kanal-16 Maria as existed on 30. 12. 1974. A Local Commissioner was appointed who submitted his report vide which he assessed the market value of the said share of the plaintiffs at Rs. 3,38,000/ -. objections were raised against the said report by judgment-debtors. Shri B. C. Rajput, Sub Judge 1st Class, Muktsar, in para No. 7 of his order dated 27. 2. 1982 found that since the plaintiffs themselves had supplied the stamp paper worth Rs. 6 lacs while assessing the market value of the property, therefore, the market value of the property in dispute was Rs. 6 lacs and the stamp paper supplied by the plaintiffs be used for the purpose of engrossing the decree.