KRISHAN LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present regular appeal has been filed against the judgments and decrees passed by the learned Courts below vide which suit for declaration with consequential relief of mandatory injunction has been declined.

(2.) THE plaintiffs appellants had filed a suit for declaration that they had purchased some plots situated in Bhagat Singh Park, Model Town Yamuna Nagar in a public auction on 31.5.1969. It was also case of the plaintiffs that initially amount of auction sale was deposited at the spot, however, thereafter they did not deposit anything in spite of number of opportunities. Thereafter, above mentioned suit was filed in the year 1991. The learned trial Court dismissed the suit by observing that the plaintiffs appellants could not be declared to be owner or bona fide purchaser as admittedly no sale-deed was executed. The other issues were decided against the appellants by observing that it was not open to the appellants plaintiffs to approach the Court after a period of 20 years and accordingly the appeal was dismissed. The learned lower appellate Court while dismissing the appeal was pleased to observe as under :-

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and find no force in the contention raised by him. It is not in dispute that the appellant- plaintiffs were not owner of the property and mere representation or visit to office could not be a ground to extend the period of limitation and, therefore, the learned trial Court was right in rejecting the suit filed by the appellants by holding it to be not-maintainable and also not within limitation. The learned lower appellate Court was not right in observing that the suit was within limitation. Accordingly, there is no merit in the appeal. Dismissed. Appeal dismissed.