BUDH RAM Vs. NIHAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants filed a suit for injunction alleging that they were proprietors with their proportionate rights in Thok Jassu of Rohtak Revenue Estate. Defendant No. 1 also had a share in the common land but he had no right to alienate the same since he had already alienated more than his share in the common land. Injunction was also sought against construction over the suit land.

(2.) DEFENDANT No. 1 respondent contested the suit, claiming exclusive possession with right of alienation. Defendant Nos. 3 to 6 also contested the suit claiming to be in possession of 360 square yards, on the basis of sale- deed executed by defendant No. 1. They submitted that land was not common land and defendant No. 1 had a right to alienate the same. Defendant Nos. 8 and 9 also contested the suit and defended purchase made by them from defendant No. 1.

(3.) ON appeal, finding of the trial Court was reversed. It was held that defendant No. 1 was co-sharer in exclusive possession and had a right to alienate subject to adjustment at the time of partition. Possession of defendant No. 1 was for more than 54 years as shown by revenue record comprising of Jamabandi for the year 1930-31 Ex. D-17 which was repeated in Jamabandi for the year 1934 Ex. D-18, 1938-39, Ex. D-19, 1942-43 Ex. D-20, 1946-47, Ex. D-21 and 1962-63 Ex. P-9 and thereafter, in Jamabandi for the year 1972-73 Ex. P-7, the family of the plaintiffs was, thus, to seek partition. The plaintiffs had indulged in various transactions and, therefore, they could not restrain alienation by the defendant.