SATBIR AND OTHERS Vs. RAM NIWAS AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Legal representatives of Hardwari and Imrat, as mentioned in the application are ordered to be brought on record for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal.

(2.) Appellant-Plaintiffs are aggrieved of the dismissal of the suit by both the Courts below on the two grounds, i.e., limitation and jurisdiction of the Civil Court.

(3.) Mr.Arun Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Kanwarbir Sidhu, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that declaration with regard to mutation entered on 20.09.1955 was challenged by filing the suit on 08.04.2002. The Courts below have dismissed the suit as noticed above on the ground that the appellants should have gone to the revenue Court for entry of fard badar. In support of his contention, he relies upon the provisions of Section 45 of Punjab Land Revenue Act to contend that remedy, if any, is only civil suit. For the purpose of limitation, he relies upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in Ibrahim alias Dharam Vir vs. Sharifan alias Shanti, 1979 PunLJ 469 to contend that entry of mutation would not give a right to the party for filing the suit, in essence, limitation would not reckon from the date of entry of mutation but it is only when the title is under cloud or possession is threatened and thus, urges this Court that it is a fit case which should have been remanded back to the Lower Appellate Court by formulating the following substantial questions of law:-