DHARAMPAL Vs. SARPANCH GRAM PANCHAYAT KAPOORI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff appellant has directed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 6.8.2013 passed by Sh. Narender Kumar, District Judge, Narnaul, vide which the appeal preferred by the plaintiff was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 14.9.2012 passed by Sh. Akshdeep Mahajan, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mohindergarh were upheld and the suit of the plaintiff remained dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case of the plaintiff are that the plaintiff and other co-sharers are recorded as owners in possession of the land measuring 7 kanal 8 marla comprised in khewat no.48, khatuni no.131, rectangle and killa no.37//20 situated within the revenue estate of village Kapoori, Tehsil and District Mohindergarh, as per jamabandi for the year 1997-98 while the defendants have no concern with the ownership and possession of the suit land. It was further pleaded that the defendants are adamant persons and in criminal conspiracy with each other, are depicting the suit land to be the ownership of Gram Panchayat and by making reference to the order dated 20.6.2006 passed by the Consolidation Officer have got mutation no.1582 sanctioned in their favour and on the basis of said mutation, the defendants are threatening to dispossess the plaintiff and other co-sharers from the suit land, whereas rectangle and killa no.37//20 never remained part of khasra no.60/1 and merely by giving wrong statement and on the basis of force, the defendants want to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit land. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff gained knowledge of the said facts only on 30.4.2007, when the defendants threatened to take possession of the suit land in pursuance of mutation no.1582 and order dated 30.6.2006 upon which the plaintiff obtained the copy of said mutation. Hence the suit.

(3.) Separate written statement was filed by defendant no.2 pleading therein that the plaintiff or other co-sharers are not recorded as owners in possession over the suit land and the order dated 20.6.2006 passed by Consolidation Officer is correct, as per law and mutation no.1582 dated 19.1.2007 has been correctly sanctioned. It was further pleaded that as per order of Consolidation Officer, 3 kanal 6 marla land comprised in rectangle and killa no.39//17/2(2k-0m), 18/1(1k-6m) has been given to the defendant, while land measuring 3 kanal 6 marla comprised in rectangle and killa no.37//20/1 has been given to defendant Gram Panchayat and as per said order, the defendant is entitled to obtain possession of the land. It was denied that the plaintiff became aware of the order passed by Consolidation Officer on 30.4.2007 as alleged. It was submitted that the proceedings for delivery of possession are being correctly conducted on the spot on the basis of order dated 30.6.2006 passed by Consolidation Officer and the plaintiff has no lawful right to create obstruction in the said proceedings. Remaining contents of the plaint were denied by defendant no.2. By way of additional pleas, it was pleaded that the plaintiff has no right to file the suit; that the suit is not maintainable in the present form; that the suit is time barred; that plaintiff is estopped from filing the suit due to his act and conduct; that the suit is not valued properly for the purpose of Court fees and jurisdiction and that the suit is false and frivolous.