SHINDERPAL SINGH Vs. JAGGAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present regular second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellants challenging the judgments and decrees dtd. 2/9/2016 and 20/2/2019 passed by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, respectively.

(2.) The facts as relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-appellants herein filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction averring therein that they were owners of 2/9th share of land measuring 43 Kanal 10 Marla and that the defendant-respondents alleged a mutual exchange of land measuring 7 Kanal 3 Marla on 9/1/2014 which was wrong as they were not the owners of 7 Kanal 3 Marla and had not made any mutual exchange with the defendant-respondents.

(3.) On notice the defendant-respondents appeared and filed their joint written statement. It was the stand taken that the exchange of land in question was affirmed by the plaintiff-appellants vide compromise deed dtd. 28/5/2014 duly signed and thumb marked by both the parties. Various other objections were raised. Preliminary objections regarding maintainability and court fees were also raised. On merits it was stated that the plaintiff-appellants had exchanged 143/870th share of land measuring 43 Kanal 10 Marla with the defendant-respondents and that the plaintiff-appellants were not owners in possession of 2/9th share of this land. It was denied that Rapat No.253 dtd. 22/1/2014 and mutation No.16344 dtd. 31/1/2014 were illegal and ineffective qua the rights of the plaintiff-appellants. Rather, the same was got entered into by the plaintiff-appellants with their own free will and sound disposing mind.