SURJAN SINGH Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , The present case has been reported by the Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala, under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, against the order dated 18.1.1990, passed by the Sub- Divisional Collector, Sunam, in a mutation case, with his recommendation that, the order of the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Lehragaga, as well as, the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Collector, Sunam, be set aside and the case be remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil)-cum-Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Sunam, with a direction, that, the mutation be sanctioned in accordance with the contents of the 'Instrument of Partition' dated 9.9.1988, as per his reference dated 29.11.1996.

(2.) THE brief facts of this case, as revealed from the record are, that, Dalip Singh had made an application to the Tehsildar-cum-Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Sunam, for the separation of his share from out of the joint land and the Tehsildar-cum-Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, after completing the partition had prepared the 'Instrument of Partition' on 9.9.1988, ordering the partition of land. During the partition proceedings, Dalip Singh had died and his sons, namely, Surjan Singh and Sukhdev Singh were brought on the record, as legal representatives of Dalip Singh. After the 'Instrument of Partition' was ready, Sukhdev Singh son of Dalip Singh had also died. Consequent upon the partition, physical possession of the partitioned land was delivered to the parties on 4.3.1989. Thereafter, mutation No. 1642 of Village Khai, Had Bast No. 65, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur, was entered by the Halqa Patwari, on the basis of the 'Instrument of Partition' for incorporating the 'Instrument of Partition' in the revenue record. However, the Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, Lehragaga, vide his order dated 26.8.1989, had rejected this mutation, on the ground, that, the LRs. of Sukhdev Singh had not been incorporated in the 'Instrument of Partition'. Against this order, Surjan Singh son of Dalip Singh and Smt. Gulab Kaur widow of Sukhdev Singh, etc. had filed an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Collector, Sunam, which was rejected vide Collector's order dated 18.1.1990. Aggrieved by this order, Surjan Singh etc. had filed a revision petition before the Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala, as a result of which, the present case has been reported.

(3.) AFTER careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find, that, the present revision petition has a merit, which deserves acceptance and the orders impugned in this case need to be set aside. The 'Instrument of Partition (Sanad Taqseem)', is prepared under Section 121 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, after the partition of agricultural land has been completed; and once the 'Instrument of Partition' has been drawn up, no appeal or revision petition is competent against it. The 'Instrument of Partition' requires to be given effect to in the revenue record, "as if, it were a decree for immovable property".