JARNAIL SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has assailed the order dated 27.05.2016 passed by Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide which order dated 19.04.2016 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalandhar, dismissing the objections filed by the petitioner was upheld.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially Civil Suit No.213 of 1978 was filed on 31.07.1976 by Jaswant Singh, Sampuran Singh and Jagjit Singh sons of Gian Singh through their attorney Faqir Singh against Harbhajan Singh etc. for possession of land measuring 580 kanals 7 marlas. During pendency of the said suit, a compromise was effected. As per compromise, 412 kanals 15 marlas of land was given to the decree holders and the remaining land was given to the predecessors-in-interest of objectors No.18 to 26 in the said proceedings. A compromise decree was passed by the trial Court at Jalandhar on 01.04.1980. The attorney of the decree holders executed four sale deeds and predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner had purchased 80 kanals of land from aforesaid Jaswant Singh, Sampuran Singh and Jagjit Singh vide registered sale deed dated 27.06.1980. Thereafter, decree holders filed Civil Suit No.62 dated 10.04.1981, challenging the sale deeds executed by Faqir Singh as well as compromise decree dated 01.04.1980. The said suit was dismissed by Sub Judge, Ist Class, Jalandhar on 31.07.1984.

(3.) Respondents/Decree holders filed Civil Suit No.19 dated 09.04.1981 against Smt. Jaswinder Kaur and others for declaration, possession and permanent injunction. The suit was partly decreed vide judgment and decree dated 18.07.1991 by Sub Judge, Ist Class, Jalandhar. Sale deeds Ex.DW2/1 dated 13.06.1980, Ex.DW2/3 dated 13.06.1980, Ex.DW2/7 dated 27.06.1980 and Ex.DW4/2 dated 13.05.1980 were held to be void and illegal. Plaintiffs were held to be owner of the land covered by the aforesaid sale deeds i.e. land measuring 412 kanals 15 marlas and they were held entitled to get possession of the aforesaid land from purchasers/defendants No.6 to 11 therein. Permanent injunction was also granted and the defendants were restrained from alienating the suit property further to anyone.