NANU RAM Vs. IMPROVEMENT TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellant challenging the judgement and decree dtd. 16/2/2011 passed by the Trial Court and the judgement and decree dtd. 10/1/2014 passed by the First Appellate Court. The present appeal has been filed alongwith an application being CM-15770-C-2018 for condonation of delay of 1544 days in filing the present appeal.

(2.) The brief facts relevant to the present lis that the plaintiff-appellant herein filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction seeking a declaration that he is a co-sharer as Biswedar in Shamlat Deh Kasba with respect to the land measuring 05 Bighas 0 Biswa comprised in Khewat No.3241 min. Khatauni No.6668 Khasra No.5848 min. (5-0) situated in Kasba Karnal and that mutation No.12911 dtd. 24/11/1986 sanctioned by the revenue officer in favour of the defendant-respondent was illegal, null, void and ineffective and was without any notice and hence not binding on the plaintiff-appellant. The plaintiff-appellant set up a case that his father Moli Ram was a joint owner in possession of the land measuring 04 Bighas 12 Biswas comprised in Khewat No.529 min./497 Khatauni No.1634 Khasra No.1650 (1-0), Khewat No.533 min. Khatauni No.1687 Khasra No.1650 (35), 1651 (0-7) situated in Kasba Karnal as per Jamabandi for the year 194344. After the death of Moli Ram, the plaintiff-appellant is in possession of the suit property being the son and legal heir of Moli Ram. He claimed to be in actual physical possession of land measuring 05 Bighas 0 Biswa. It was averred that the land was Shamlat Deh of Kasba Karnal and that the plaintiff-appellant had planted trees besides sowing vegetables in the suit land. It was further the case that the defendant-respondent i.e. Improvement Trust, Karnal had no right, title or interest in the suit property. Further challenge was laid to the mutation No.12911 which was entered in favour of the defendant-respondent. It was pleaded that the said mutation was against the facts and records and that while sanctioning the mutation the instructions of the Financial Commissioner have not been followed.

(3.) The defendant-respondent filed a written statement raising various preliminary objections including the suit being barred under Sec. 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. On merits it was claimed that the plaintiff-appellant was not in possession of the land and Khasra No.5848, which consists of a large area measuring 346 Bighas extending from Sabji Mandi Bridge to Meerut Road Bridge and Mughal Canal was carved out during the Mughal era for irrigation purposes, which is about 259 to 300 feet in width. It was further the case set up that during the Mughal era no individual had any right and the entire estate was considered to be the estate of the King. Consolidation took place from the year 1884-85 as per Jamabandi for the year 1884. The Mughal Canal was recorded as ownership of the Provincial Government and the Irrigation Department used to manage and control the land. After diversion of the canal water in the Western Yamuna Canal, the Mughal Canal was used for discharge of rainwater of Kasba Karnal as well as for sullage and dirty domestic water of Karnal. As per Sec. 61 of the Haryana Municipal (Committee) Act, 1973, all streams vested in the Municipal Committee including the Mughal Canal. In between, the Mughal Canal was transferred to HUDA after the development of Sector 13. However, subsequently in 1986 the Canal was transferred to the Improvement Trust and thus mutation No.12911 was sanctioned in favour of the Karnal Improvement Trust on 24/11/1986.