RAM SARUP Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this order. Cr. M. Nos. 3188-M and 3563-M of 1986 shall stand disposed of, since they arise out of the same prosecution.

(2.) HARDIAL Singh, a resident of Canada, but of India origin, owned some agricultural land in village Bapiana in District Bhatinda. On 6-6-1979, while in India, he mortgaged some of his land to Joginder Singh and his two sons Gurdarshan Singh and Sikandar Singh for a sum of Rs. 30,000/ -. The mortgage was by means of a registered deed. In his absence, however, on 4-2-1980, mutation was entered by Jarnail Singh petitioner, who was the Patwari of the area. It so happened that he mistakenly/wrongly entered the mutation as if of sale by Hardial Singh in favour of Joginder Singh and others. As per departmental instructions, the entry required to be attested by the Field Kanungo. Since the Field Kanungo statedly was not available, the entry was got attested on 21-2-1980 from Babu Singh petitioner, who as the Senior-most Patwari acted as a Kanungo. The mutation came up for sanctioning before Ram Sarup petitioner, Naib Tehsildar (since retired) on 22-2-1980 who mistakenly/wrongly recording in his order that he had gone through the contents of the sale deed, ordered sanction of mutation of sale in favour of Joginder Singh and others.

(3.) SOMEWHERE in October/november, 1982, Hardial Singh was informed in Canada that his land in revenue papers had been shown be to sold. Accordingly, to safeguard his interest, he came to India. It appears that on 4-1-1983, he filed a suit for declaration challenging the validity of the mutation and the interests it purported to have shown to have been transferred to Joginder Singh and others. The defendants Joginder Singh and others put in appearance before the Civil Court and did not dispute the error in the mutation. Consequently, the suit was decreed on consent by the Civil Court on 22-1-1983. Hardial Singh seemingly was satisfied thereafter when he obtained a decree in his favour.