BHAJAN KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 24.7.2003 (Annexure-P.1) passed by the learned Financial Commissioner, Appeals-II, Punjab (respondent No. 2) in a revision petition filed by respondents No. 5 to 9 whereby the order dated 30.4.2002 (Annexure- P.2) passed by the Divisional Commissioner Patiala (respondent No. 2) has been set aside.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that Ram Singh, father of respondents No. 5 to 9 and father-in-law of petitioner Bhajan Kaur widow of Norang Singh was the owner of 1/6 share of agricultural land measuring 150 Bighas 11= Biswas and two houses. Ram Singh died on 24.6.1976 leaving behind his widow Jangir Kaur and four sons, namely, Mohinder Singh, Amrik Singh, Bant Singh and Norang Singh, besides one daughter, namely, Mohinder Kaur. Norang Singh and his brother Bant Singh sons of Ram Singh filed Civil Suit No. 275 of 3.11.1978 for joint possession of the suit land in Village Kukar Majra, besides two houses etc. It was alleged by the plaintiffs Norang Singh and Bant Singh that they along with their father Ram Singh and brothers Mohinder Singh and Amrik Singh constituted a Joint Hindu Family with Ram Singh as 'Karta' and he died on 24.6.1976 leaving behind his sons as his only legal heirs. The suit land and the house described in the heading of the plaint were the ancestral joint Hindu property of the plaintiffs and defendants No. 1 to 3 in the said suit and Ram Singh deceased. Jangir Kaur widow of Ram Singh filed a separate Civil Suit No. 184 of 24.7.1979 claiming possession of the land. It was alleged by her that Ram Singh had executed a Will dated 5.9.1974 bequeathing his property to her and after the death of Ram Singh she by virtue of the same became the sole owner of the estate of Ram Singh. Norang Singh son of Ram Singh died during the pendency of the suit before the trial Court and his LRs namely Bhajan Kaur, widow (petitioner) and his daughters Sarabjit Kaur, Paramjit Kaur, Harbans Kaur and Charanjit Kaur were impleaded as plaintiffs in the suit. Bant Singh another son of Ram Singh had filed Civil Suit No. 207 of 4.2.1991 for permanent injunction against Jangir Kaur widow of Ram Singh, Mohinder Singh and Amrik Singh sons of Ram Singh and Bhajan Kaur widow of Norang Singh son of Ram Singh. He claimed permanent injunction restraining the said defendants from forcibly dispossessing him and from interfering in his peaceful possession of the land as detailed in the head note of the plaint. Civil Suit No. 275 of 3.11.1978 filed by Norang Singh and Bant Singh sons of Ram Singh and Civil Suit No. 184 of 24.7.1979 filed by Jangir Kaur were consolidated. The learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 13.1.1984 dismissed the suit filed by Jangir Kaur and decreed the suit filed by Norang Singh and Bant Singh holding that they were entitled to 7/36 share in the estate of Ram Singh including the houses. Jangir Kaur widow of Ram Singh filed two separate appeals against the judgment and decree dated 13.1.1984 of the trial Court which were disposed of by the learned Additional District Judge Patiala vide judgment and decree dated 10.10.1986. The appeals filed by Jangir Kaur were dismissed. However, the order of the trial Court was modified to the effect that instead of 7/36 share awarded to the plaintiff in the properties described in sub-heads 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D' they were held entitled to 7/30 share each. With the said modification in the decree of the trial Court, the appeals were dismissed.

(3.) IT may be noticed that the dispute in the case primarily is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to 7/30 share or is entitled to 7/36 share in the estate of Ram Singh. In terms of the judgment and decree dated 10.10.1986 passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala it was held that Norang Singh (since deceased and represented by his LRs) and his brother Bant Singh plaintiffs as also the other brothers, namely, Mohinder Singh and Amrik Singh were entitled to 7/30 share each in the properties described in head-notes 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'D'. In order to seek correction of the said judgment and decree dated 10.10.1986 an application dated 15.12.1992 was filed under Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('C.P.C.' - for short) for modification of the decree. It was claimed that there was a mistake in the calculation of the shares and in fact the widow and daughters of Norang Singh were entitled to 7/36 share each. The said application dated 15.12.1992 under Section 152 CPC was dismissed on 4.10.1999 with the observation that remedy available to the petitioner was to file a review application. A revision petition was filed against the order dated 4.10.1999 in this Court which was disposed of on 22.2.2000 with the observations that the petitioner may file a review application before the Court of competent jurisdiction along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and if such an application is filed the same, it was observed, shall be considered sympathetically keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and that the petitioner was wrongly prosecuting her remedy under Section 152 CPC which was not legally maintainable. Accordingly, a review petition was filed by respondents No. 5 to 9 which has been dismissed on ground of limitation by the learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib on 17.8.2006. Against the said decision, Civil Revision Nos.5027 and 5028 of 2006 have been filed in this Court which are listed for hearing on 25.11.2009. Therefore, as of now it is the judgment and decree dated 10.10.1986 passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala which is final between the parties. However, this is subject to the decision in Civil Revision Nos.5027 and 5028 of 2006 which are with respect to the share of Bhajan Kaur and her daughters Sarabjit Kaur, Paramjit Kaur, Harbans Kaur and Charanjit Kaur. In case the share is modified the mutation would have to be sanctioned accordingly.