MAJOR SINGH Vs. GURJANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHINT Kaur widow of Chanan Singh sold land situated in village Jai Singh Wala, measuring 15 kanals 15 marlas vide registered sale deed dated 21.7.1992 in favour of Gurjant Singh, respondent. Mutation No. 9094 of the said village was entered on the basis of this sale deed where it was shown that she had sold land out of khasra number 1526, khewat number 210, Khatuni number 547 measuring 25 kanals. The mutation was sanctioned by Assistant Collector Grade-II on the basis of this sale deed on 22.10.1992. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector, Sub-Division, Bathinda on the grounds that Chint Kaur could not have sold this specific khasra number as she was not in exclusive possession of the same. The Collector dismissed the revision petition on 26.4.1993 on the ground that the possession of the land in dispute had been transferred as per citation in the sale deed and the nehri khatunis confirmed the transfer of possession in favour of the vendee. Hence the reference from the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot.

(2.) THE ground in reference is that (i) no notice was issued to the petitioners who are co-sharers in the joint khata while sanctioning the mutation (ii) khasra number 1526 measuring 25 kanals was in joint possession of co-sharers and Chint Kaur (now deceased) was not in exclusive possession of land measuring 15 kanals 15 marlas sold by her.

(3.) WHILE the right of a co-sharer to alienate his share in a joint holding cannot be disputed, he is not authorised to alienate any specific khasra number unless it is done with the consent of the share-holder or he is in exclusive possession of the same and the vendee of such a property cannot seek exclusive possession on the sole ground that the registered sale deed, says so. He can seek exclusive possession on the basis of partition where he can press his claim for preference, if so warranted. The law that every co-sharer is deemed to be in possession of every inch of joint holding has been laid down in section 44 of the Transfer of Propert Act and has been upheld by our own High Court vide citation 1981 PLJ 204 - Bhartu v. Ram Sarup as also vide 1989(2) RRR 71.