BALBIR Vs. RAMJI LAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is in second appeal having initially filed a suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants-respondents from interfering in his possession over the suit land, who are admittedly the owners of the suit land, which the appellant-plaintiff claimed to be in possession of, having allegedly purchased tenancy rights from the original owner, i.e. Sultan Singh, in the year 1991.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that cultivating possession of the appellant was duly reflected in the column of cultivation, in the jamandies from the year 1991 onwards, and during the pendency of the suit he was dispossessed by the respondents-defendants in 2007, leading to his filing an application for amendment of the plaint, which was dismissed in the year 2007 itself.

(3.) However, a perusal of the judgment of the learned lower appellate Court shows that the appellant-plaintiff could not refute the finding that the change in the revenue entries from the years 1990-91, in the column of cultivation, was made without any notice issued to the respondents, who were, admittedly, the owners of the suit land, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 37 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, as also the provisions of the Punjab Land Records Manual, which lay down the procedure for change in the entries in the jamabandi.