(1.) THE vendee-plaintiffs have filed this appeal to challenge the judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below whereby their suit and the appeal against the partition of the land ordered by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Guhla, vide order dated 16.7.1975, were dismissed.
(2.) IN brief the facts giving rise to this appeal are that defendant-respondent Nos. 1 to 5 filed an application for partition of the suit land against Smt. Kirpal Kaur (plaintiff No. 1) and defendant Nos. 6 to 15 in the Court of Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Guhla. In that application Smt. Kirpal Kaur was proceeded against ex parte. The partition was confirmed on 16.6.1975 and the case was fixed for instrument of partition for 16.7.75. Rai Jasbir Singh, plaintiff No. 2 purchased land measuring 80 Kanals from Smt. Kirpal Kaur (plaintiff No. 1) vide sale-deed dated 27.5.1975 during the pendency of the partition proceedings and plaintiff No. 2 and 3, i.e., Rai Jasbir Singh and Swaran Singh were in actual physical possession of 228 Kanals 8 Marlas and 77 Kanals 8 Marlas, respectively. The plaintiffs challenged the order dated 16.7.1975 passed by the Assistant Grade Ist Class, Guhla, by filing the present suit for declaration, which was dismissed by the Sub-Judge Ist Class Ist Class, Kaithal, vide judgment and decree dated 29.1.1980 on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The plaintiffs then filed appeal to challenge the judgment and decree dated 29.1.1980 passed by the trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Smt. Kirpal Kaur withdrew herself from being the appellant. Consequently, vide order dated 17.11.1980 the appeal qua Kirpal Kaur was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn. The appeal qua the remaining two appellants, i.e., Rai Jasbir and Swaran Singh (present appellants) was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, vide judgment and decree dated 4.12.1981 and the decision of the trial Court with regard to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court was upheld. Now Rai Jasbir Singh and Swaran Singh have filed the present appeal wherein challenge has been made to the findings of both the Courts below.
(3.) THE contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellants have been controverted by Mr. M.L. Sarin, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the respondents. It has been contended by him that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to go into the validity of the partition proceedings. The appellants have approached the Civil Court without exhausting the remedy available to them under Section 13 of the Act. It has further been contended by him that Smt. Kirpal Kaur had duly been served in the partition proceedings by sending notice to her by registered post. The counsel has also contended that she had withdrawn her appeal before the lower appellate Court and in this view of the matter, the present appellants, who had purchased the land from her during the pendency of the partition proceedings, had no locus standi to challenge the order of partition passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade.