DARBARA SINGH Vs. JAGTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case has been reported by the Commissioner (Appeals), Ferozepur and Patiala Divisions, Patiala, under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, against the order dated 21.8.89, passed by the Collector, Malerkotla, with his recommendation, that, the order dated 23.2.1989, passed by the Assistant Collector, 2nd Grade, Ahmedgarh, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, as well as, the order dated 21.8.89, passed by the Collector, Malerkotla, passed in the case of Mutation No. 3396 of Village Kup-Kalan, be set aside, as per his reference dated 14.11.1994.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case, are, that, Mohinder Kaur d/o Harnam Kaur d/o Sunder Singh, had sold land measuring 8-0, with specific Khasra numbers to Jagtar Singh and Avtar Singh sons of Charan Singh, as per the registered sale deed, dated 21.2.1989, from out of the joint-khata, with the petitioners Darbara Singh etc. on the plea, that the said area was in her exclusive possession. Mutation No. 3396 of Village Kup-Kalan was sanctioned by the Assistant Collector, 2nd Grade, Ahmedgarh, on 23.2.1989, regarding the change of ownership of land, in favour of vendees Jagtar Singh and Avtar Singh. Against this order, Darbara Singh and Gurmeet Singh, had filed an appeal before the Collector, Malerkotla, who, had rejected the same, as per his order dated 21.8.1989, on the ground, that it was barred by time. Against this order of the Collector, Darbara Singh etc. had filed the revision petition before the Commissioner (Appeals), Ferozepur and Patiala Divisions, as a result of which, the present case has been reported, recommending the setting aside of the impugned orders in this case. The operative part of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)'s order reads as follows :- "From the perusal of the record, it is clearly established that respondents did not have exclusive possession of the Khasra Nos. which have been sold by them."

(3.) NONE , from either side, came present to argue this case. As this is a reference case, and an opportunity of being heard has been provided to both the sides, it has been thought appropriate to decide this case on merit, on the basis of the facts available on the record.