HAKAM SINGH (DECEASED) Vs. BANTA SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will also dispose of Civil Revision Petition No. 489 of 1980, as the facts are common in both these cases.

(2.) HAKAM Singh, Angrez Singh and Hazur Singh are the sons of Harnam Singh. They had one third share each in the suit land measuring 23 kanals 8 marks bearing khasra No. 1047. It is the common case of the parties that the said khasra No along with khasras Nos. 1027 and 1046, was sold vide sale deed dated June 1, 1978, Exhibit P.W.6/A, in favour of the Plaintiff Banta Singh and others by Angrez Singh and Hazur Singh only. According to the vendees, since the vendors were in exclusive possession of these khasra Nos they delivered possession to them at the time of sale. Rather, their case is that prior to the sale, the land consisting of these three khasras Nos was already mortgaged with them and, thus, they were in possession thereof. Hakam Singh, Appellant, claiming himself to be in exclusive possession of khasra Nos. 1047, measuring 23 kanals 8 marlas, filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, (hereinafter called the Act), on December 5, 1978, against Banta Singh and others. That suit was contested by the Defendants The trial Court found therein as follows:

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Defendant -Appellant Hakam Singh submitted that the findings given in the earlier suit under Section 6 of the Act operated as res judicata. According to the learned Counsel, in that suit, it was found that Hakam Singh was in exclusive possession of khasra No. 1047 and, therefore, the same was binding in the present suit In support of the contention, the learned Counsel relied upon Raj Gopal v. Sarat Kumari Debi : A.I.R. 1928 Cal. 758, and Hridayanath v. Prabodhchandra : A.I.R. 1933 Cal. 923. It was also contended that since Angrez Singh and Hakam Singh were not in exclusive possession of khasra No. 1047, the same could not be sold specifically in favour of Banta Singh and others.