STATE OF HARYANA Vs. LAJWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present appeal has been directed against concurrent findings recorded by the Courts whereby suit for declaration in respect of land measuring 12 kanal 5 marlas and possession of land measuring 7 kanal 12 marlas out of land measuring 12 kanal 5 marlas, detailed in para 1 (un-numbered) of the judgment of trial Court was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 30.03.2013 and appeal preferred by unsuccessful appellant-State of Haryana was dismissed on 25.05.2017 by the Additional District Judge, Jind.

(2.) Counsel for the appellant, in response to a query, would fairly inform that in none of the documents produced on record by the appellant, there is reference to disputed land to substantiate plea of the appellant that land in question was acquired in the year 1956 even before bifurcation of State of Punjab and Haryana in November 1966. It is further argued that the respondent/defendant filed suit in respect of the suit land in the year 1993 and long delay of more than 30 years in seeking the remedy before the Court in law speaks volumes that claim raised by the respondent/defendant is hollow, therefore, when the case is examined from the point of view of equity, the Courts have wrongly dismissed claim of the appellant - State of Haryana. Counsel would inform that litigation initiated by Smt. Lajwanti remained pending upto Hon 'ble the Supreme Court but in the suit filed by her, defence of State of Haryana was struck off and as such the State was deprived of an opportunity to adduce evidence though the witnesses examined by the respondent in the said case were cross examined. It is further argued that the present suit was filed by the appellant in view of liberty given by Hon 'ble the Supreme Court to establish that the judgment and decree passed in the suit filed by Smt. Lajwanti or the allegations raised in the suit filed by her in the year 1993 are based upon fraud.

(3.) Apart from the fact that the appeal has been filed after delay of 216 days, the same merits rejection.