SOM NATH Vs. KAUSHLYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit for permanent injunction, the appellants claimed themselves to be owners in possession of the suit land measuring 24 kanals, on the basis of a registered sale-deed dated 24.3.1988 executed in their favour by its owner, Hans Raj. It was further pleaded that mutation on the basis of sale-deed was also sanctioned in their favour. Inspite of that, the contesting respondent Kaushlya Devi had been threatening to dispossess them from the land, which led to the filing of suit.

(2.) Kaushlya Devi contested the suit, pleading that Hans Raj never owned the suit land. He had, however, forged a will of its previous owner Dropti Devi (mother of Kaushlya Devi), in his favour, in respect of the land and got a mutation sanctioned in his favour on the basis thereof. Kaushlya Devi, later on, contested the mutation which was set aside vide order of the Collector, Ex.D1. Inheritance of Dropti Devi was, then mutated in favour of all her legal heirs, including Kaushlya Devi. During the interregnum, the appellants, had, in connivance with Hans Raj, got a sale-deed prepared from Hans Raj in respect of the suit land, in their favour, and land had been mutated also, in their favour. This mutation was, later on, set aside on finding that Hans Raj had no authority to sell the land. On the basis of these facts, it was pleaded that since the alleged vendor of the appellants was not the owner of the suit land, he could not have conveyed any title to the appellants, in respect thereof.

(3.) On the conclusion of trial, the trial court, on the basis of evidence led by the parties, recorded a finding against the appellants plaintiffs, regarding ownership and also possession over the suit land, by holding in para No. 12 of its judgment dated 25.11.2005, as follows: