LAKHA SINGH Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition has been preferred against the impugned order passed by the Ld. District Judge, Amritsar in Civil Appeal No.135 of 2018 on 06.02.2019 (Annexure P-10) whereby the Appeal filed on behalf of the Petitioner against the dismissal of his Application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of the CPC in CS No.1006 of 2018, passed by the Ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar on 20.08.2018 (Annexure P-8) was dismissed.

(2.) Background of the matter is that the Petitioner had filed the said Suit against the Respondents, who were arraigned as Defendants No.1 to 5 by contending that he was co-sharer in the disputed land along with the Proforma Defendant No.6, namely, Mahenga Singh, and that he had acquired the said land from its erstwhile owner Gian Singh (since deceased), who happens to be the predecessor-in-interest of the Respondents/Defendants. The Suit filed by him was for a declaration that he is the owner in possession of the disputed lands along with the Proforma Respondent No.6, with an alternative prayer for a direction upon the Respondents to execute the sale deed in favour of the Petitioner and the Proforma Defendant No.6 in terms of the earlier Compromise dated 24.02.1994. He had further prayed for permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants or any other persons claiming through them from forcibly dispossessing him from the disputed lands on the basis of any order obtained by way of 'Form-K' from the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade or from the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar.

(3.) The chain of events leading up to the present litigation can be summarized by first taking note of the fact that a large area of the land measuring 53 Kanals 17 Marlas originally held by one Anant Ram was declared surplus and mutated in favour of the State in the year 1951. The said Anant Ram died in 1973 and ten years later, one of his Legal Representatives namely Abinash Rani filed CWP No.5055 of 1983 challenging the order declaring the said land surplus, which was passed way back on 10.10.1961. The Writ Petition was dismissed on 15.2.2006 and LPA No.124 of 2006 preferred against such dismissal was also dismissed on 8.10.2010. The Writ Petitioner thereafter filed a Review Application against such Judgment of dismissal, but even that was dismissed by the concerned Bench on 3.4.2012, after which, the SLP preferred by her was also dismissed by the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the land in question had been allotted in favour of Gian Singh way back in 1963. But on account of dismissal of the proceedings arising out of CWP No.5055 of 1983, vide which, the order holding the land surplus was upheld, its subsequent allotment in favour of Gian Singh was got perfected. But during the pendency of the Writ Petition, three other Legal Representatives, namely Saroj, Rajesh and Brij Bala had sold an area measuring 17 Kanals 2 Marlas in favour of one Kirpal Singh on 1.7.1990. The said Kirpal Singh in turn sold the land in favour of four persons, namely Gurdeep, Baldev, Joginder and Tarsem in 1991. In the same year, Gian Singh, whose allotment/Title to the allotted land had subsequently become perfected after dismissal of the Writ Petition, then filed a Suit for possession against the vendees of Kirpal Singh, namely Gurdeep and Tarsem. The Suit was initially decreed ex parte on 17.9.1991, but according to the Petitioner, the said decree was not executed. Subsequently, both the aforesaid Defendants on 23.1.1993 filed their Application for setting aside the ex parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC. During the pendency of the Application, they alongwith their co-vendees sold some portion of the land in favour of the present Petitioner Lakha Singh and his brother Mehanga Singh on 21.2.1994. The Respondent/Plaintiff Gian Singh compromised the matter with the Petitioner and his brother Mehanga Singh (Respondent No.6) and a statement to that effect was given along with an Application to withdraw the Suit on 24/2/1994. The Application was allowed by the Court concerned and the Suit was dismissed as withdrawn in view of the compromise between the parties. It may be mentioned that the compromise was on account of the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 having passed on consideration money to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- to the said Gian Singh in view of the land which was allegedly in their possession.