KASHMIR KAUR Vs. SUKHWANT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KASHMIR Kaur, petitioner-respondent No. 1 filed an application for leading secondary evidence to prove agreement/compromise between the parties. The application was rejected by the trial Court by order dated 12.12.2001. It is this order which has been impugned by defendant No. 1 in this revision petition.

(2.) PLAINTIFF -respondents 1 and 2 filed a suit for declaration that they were owners of land measuring 242 Kanals 16 Marlas and perpetual lessee of land measuring 40 Kanals on the basis of Will dated 29.5.1994 executed by one Inder Singh son of Ganga Singh. A prayer was also made for a decree for possession of two rooms in the house of the share of aforesaid Inder Singh. It was stated that mutation No. 2582 of inheritance of aforesaid Inder Singh sanctioned on 8.8.1994 in favour of defendants 1 and 2 and subsequent resultant entries in the revenue record and registered sale deed executed by defendant No. 1 i.e. the petitioner in favour of defendant No. 4 in respect of 481/4856 share of aforesaid land measuring 242 Kanals 16 Marlas on the basis of mutation No. 2582 and resultant mutation Nos. 2609 and 2608 sanctioned on 31.8.1995 were wrong, illegal, null and void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiffs. As a consequential relief, it was also prayed that the plaintiffs were entitled for possession of land measuring 242 Kanals 16 Marlas and 40 Kanals on the basis of their title.

(3.) THE application was resisted by the plaintiffs. It was denied that any compromise had taken place between the parties or that the original compromise was with the plaintiffs. It was stated that if the petitioner possessed any compromise as has been stated by her, the same was a forged document.