KRISHAN LAL Vs. RAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent has been preferred by the appellant- respondents against the judgement dated 22.3.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 10509 of 1994. The learned Single Judge has accepted the claim made by the petitioner- respondents that their predecessor in interest were equal share holders in the land allotted to one of them in lieu of the joint land left by them in West Pakistan at the time of their migration to India.

(2.) THE facts of this case are rooted in the saga of partition which left lakhs of people homeless because they have to run for shelter to safer area. One Mansa Ram who lived in West Pakistan had two sons namely Gobind Ram and Tula Ram. The appellants before us are the successors of Gobind Ram. They were respondent in the petition. The writ petition was filed by the successors of Tula Ram. Both the brothers owned land in village Hatti Hassan Ali, District Muzzaffargarh now in West Pakistan. They were owner in possession of the land jointly in equal shares.

(3.) THE litigation ensued between the collaterals and the revision petition filed by the appellant-respondents under Section 24 of the Act was accepted on 26.10.1993 on the ground that the original allotment was made to Gobind Ram in the year 1949 alone recording him to be the sole owner of the land in question and after 15 years the Assistant Registrar, Jalandhar could not have issued an order by incorporating the name of Tula Ram or his successors. The rectification order issued on 20.7.1964 was also set aside on the ground that no order could have been passed against the dead person and in favour of another dead person especially when the order was not implemented for a fairly long time. The legal heirs of Tula Ram filed a petition under Section 33 of the Act and lost the litigation before the Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana who dismissed their petition vide order dated 5.5.1994. It was against the aforementioned order that CWP No. 10509 of 1994 was filed. The learned Single Judge after noticing all the afore- mentioned facts has reiterated the order dated 20.7.1964 issued by the Managing Officer (Annexure P.1). The plea of non availability of the record raised by the appellant-respondent has been repelled by holding that it was the responsibility of the Government and not of the petitioner- respondent. In support of his finding the learned Single Judge has placed firm reliance on the copy of Jamabandi (P.7) which in unequivocal terms shows that the land was in the joint name of Gobind Ram and Tula Ram sons of Mansa Ram alongwith others shown to be as small owners/ mortgagee in six shares i.e. Ala Baksh etc. According to the Jamabandi of the year 1946-47 the land is shown to be situated in village Thati/69/Issan Alia Tehsil Kot Adu, District Mujjafargarh. The learned Single Judge also reached the conclusion that a categorical averment made in para 13(vi) have not been contested by the respondents by giving any categorical denial. It has been inferred from the pleadings that the land was in equal shares of both the brothers Gobind Ram and Tula Ram. The learned Single Judge also concluded that initial error becomes apparent from another fact as Gobind Ram has claimed in form (R.4/1) where he had stated that the land in question was situated in City Kot Adu, District Muzzaffargarh and the appellant-respondents could not produce any document to the effect that the land which was left in Pakistan was comprised in any other village. The entry in the Jamabandi for the year 1967-68 (P.9) further show that Himti Bai d/o Asa Nand son of Gobind Ram son of Mansa Ram were the owners in equal shares which was based on the U.O. Dated 20.7.1964. The afore-mentioned Jamabandi has never been challenged by the appellant-respondents. The learned Single Judge placed firm reliance on the Jamabandi of the year 1946-47 and concluded the issue as under :