HAZUR SINGH Vs. JAGGAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAUJA Singh, who is not a party to the present litigation directly sold the land in dispute to I share Singh, Hazura Singh and Sapuran Singh, who are three real brothers and who were defendants in the suit from which this appeal has arisen. Harnek Singh and Mohinder Singh, minor sons of Fauja Singh, vendor instituted a suit for possession of the land in question on the basis of a claim for pre-emption. On 28th of January, 1959 this suit was compromised. The compromise decree was to the effect that the sale was converted into a mortgage for the sum of Rs. 9,300 and the plaintiffs were given the right to redeem the property by paying that amount to the defendants. In this compromise the minors, who were plaintiffs in the pre-emption suit, acted through their mother as their next friend and natural guardian.

(2.) IT appears that subsequently Harnek Singh, etc. , acting through their mother further mortgaged the property in question for a total sum of Rs. 12,000 and left rs. 9,3000 out of the said mortgage amount with Ujagar Singh (Jaggar Singh)plaintiff for payment by him directly to the mortgagee, i. e. , Hazura Singh and his brothers, defendants in the instant suit. According to the allegations of Ujagar singh he paid out the said sum of Rs. 9, 3000 to Hazura Singh etc. , vide receipt exhibit P. 2 on the 9th of March, 1959 and redeemed the property. On 1-12-1961 ujagar Singh filed a suit for possession of the land in question on the ground that it belonged to him under the compromise decree dated 28-1-1959 consequent on his having paid out the total sum of Rs. 9, 300. He further alleged that in spite of his having paid out the total sum of Rs. 9,300 and in spite of his having taken possession of the land at the time of redemption he had been subsequently dispossessed forcibly by Hazura Singh and others. In para 3 of the plaint of this suit it was stated as follows:-

(3.) THE suit was contested on behalf of the defendants who denied the receipt of rs. 9,300/- in question and claimed to be in possession of the property as mortgagees and averred that the plaintiff was not entitled to take possession of the same with out paying Rs. 9, 300/-From the pleadings of other parties following issues were framed by the trial Court :-1. Whether Harnek Singh, Mohinder Singh through their next friend Mst. Mukhtiar Kaur mortgaged 29 Bighas 10 Biswas kham comprised in khasra No. 1262 with Ujjagar Singh plaintiff for Rs. 12,000/- on 9-361 ? (should be 9-3-59 ). Whether the plaintiff redeemed the said land from the defendants on payment of Rs. 9,300/- and took possession thereof ? whether the defendants took possession of the land in dispute illegally 11/2 years prior to the institution of the suit ? whether the land mentioned in para 5 of the plaint has been allotted in consolidation proceedings in lieu of Khasra No. 1262 ? whether the suit is correctly valued for purposes of court fee and jurisdiction ? relief.