PAL SINGH Vs. UMA MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SARVSHRI Pal Singh, Apar Singh, Bhajan Singh, Dilbagh Singh, Jagir Singh, Kashmir Singh and Lakha Singh i. e. plaintiffs No. 1 to 7 in the trial Court have filed the present Regular Second Appeal and it has been directed against the Judgment and decree dated 8. 5. 1987 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Amritsar, who affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Court of-Sub Judge IInd Class, Ajnala dated 31. 10. 1983 vide which the suit of the present plaintiffs for declaration and injunction was partly decreed holding that plaintiffs were the joint owners/co-sharers of the land to the extent of 42 Kanals 7 marlas being 1/15th share of the land measuring 642 Kanals 9 marlas and they are in possession of the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 51/6, 7, 8/1, 14, 15, 16 and 25 measuring 53 kanals 2 marlas. The defendants were also restrained from dispossessing the plaintiffs from this area of land measuring 53 kanals 2 marlas referred to above forcibly or illegally.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the present appellant-plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they are owners and in possession of the land measuring 160 kanals 6 marlas fully described in the head-note of the plaint as per jamabandi for the year 1977-78 situated in village Mudh Bhilowal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining defendants No. 1 to 10 namely Smt. Uma Mehta, Raj Karni Vohra, Rajan Vohra, Bhumeshwar Rai Mehta, Rajiv Rai Mehta, Kanwar Rai Mehta, Surinder Mohan Mehta, Sahil Mehta and Joginder Pal Mehta from interfering in the lawful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land and the case set up by the plaintiffs was that they are in possession of the suit land for the last more than 20 years. Previously, they were tenants under Amir Chand son of Mathura Dass of village Mudh Bhilowal, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar. Said Amir Chand died on 31. 12. 1976. Thereafter the plaintiffs purchased the suit land vide two registered sale deeds dated 24. 7. 1980 from Labh Chand and Iqbal Chand sons of Amir Chand, who were the only heirs of Amir Chand by virtue of a will. After the purchase of the suit land the plaintiffs are in possession of the same as owners. Defendants No. 1 to 7 alleged to have purchased the suit land from defendants No. 8 to 10 but the sale deed, if any, in their favour, is illegal, ineffective and against the rights of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were not bound by the sale deed allegedly executed by defendants No. 1 to 7 in favour of defendants No. 8 to 10.

(3.) THE plaintiffs filed replication to the written statement filed by defendants, in which they reiterated their allegations made in the plaint by denying those of the written statement and from the pleadings of the parties the learned trial Court framed the following issues: