DARSHAN SINGH Vs. MOHINDER KAUR (DECEASED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This suit was brought by Ujagar Singh (who died during its pendency in the trial Court and the present appellants were brought on the record as his legal representatives) for a declaration that he was owner in possession of 564/7377th share in the suit land, measuring 54 Kanals 18 Marlas. According to the allegations in the plaint, the plaintiff was a co- sharer with defendants No. 1 to 3 and Munsha Singh husband of Mohinder Kaur, defendant No. 4. The plaintiff had 1/3rd share in the joint land while defendants No. 1 to 3 had 1/3rd share and Munsha Singh was the owner of the remaining 1/3rd share. Out of the joint land, Munsha Singh sold to him Khasra No. 273/1, measuring 7 Kanals 9 Marlas and No. 299, measuring 1 Kanal, vide Jamabandi for the year 1999-2000 BK, vide sale deed dated 14.2.2003 BK for Rs. 700/- and delivered the possession to him and since then, he was in possession of the suit land and other land, as co-sharer, along with defendants No. 1 to 3 and the said Munsha Singh and his successors-in-interest. Consolidation proceedings took place in the village (somewhere in 1960) and in lieu of pre- consolidation joint land of the parties, the suit land was allotted jointly to them. About 4 months prior to the filing of the suit, he came to know that mutation with respect to Khasra No. 299 had been sanctioned in his favour after the sale in his favour, but, somehow the mutation with respect to Khasra No. 273/1 had not been sanctioned, and no land was allotted to him in lieu of the latter Khasra number. After calculating the value of the land which was put in the hotch-potch and of the land which was allotted after those proceedings the plaintiffs claim 564/7377th share in lieu of Khasra No. 273/1. It may be mentioned that defendants No. 5 and 6 were made parties, as part of the suit land had been sold by Mohinder Kaur defendant to them.

(2.) In this appeal, only issues No. 2, 4 and 5 are relevant as only those issues have been decided against the appellants by the learned appellate Court.

(3.) First, I will take up issue No. 2. Both the learned Courts below have held that Ujagar Singh had purchased Khasra Nos. 273/1 and 299 from Munsha Singh who was husband of Mohinder Kaur defendant No. 4. Khasra No. 299 was sold by Munsha Singh out of Shamilat land while Khasra No. 273/1 was sold by him out of the joint Khata in which Ujagar Singh had 1/3rd share and the remaining 2/3rd share belonged to Munsha Singh and defendants No. 1 to 3. After consolidation proceedings, the parties or their predecessors-in-interest were allotted land jointly and their share in the joint land were recorded as before. Thus, it is clear that Ujagar Singh plaintiff had not been allotted any land in consolidation proceedings in lieu of Khasra No. 273/1.