SUKHWINDER SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Decree passed by the Ld. Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana in Civil Appeal No.70 of 2010 dated 03.08.2012, vide which, the original Judgment & Decree dismissing the Civil Suit filed by the Apapellant were upheld.

(2.) The Suit was filed by the Appellant, who had claimed that the Central Government is the owner of land measuring 36 K 14 M comprised in Khewat No.63, Khatauni No.136, Killa No.31//15 min, 16 min, 17, 18, 23, 24 as mentioned in the Jamabandi for the year 1999-2000 situated in village Hadiwal, Tehsil & District Ludhiana and he is in actual physical & cultivating possession of the disputed land. It has been averred that Pritam Singh son of Khushi Ram was originally cultivating the said land and he handed over its possession to the Appellant. He had deposited the land revenue and said Pritam Singh had also given an affidavit and an Agreement in his favour. It has been further averred that the Respondents have no legal Right, Title or Interest in the suit property and without any right of justification, they were threatening to dispossess and to interfere in the peaceful possession of the Appellant over the disputed land illegally, forcibly and without due course of law. Hence, the present Suit.

(3.) The Respondents contested the Suit by filing their Written Statement(s), in which it was claimed that the possession of disputed land, which originally belonged to Respondent No.2 since prior to 1967-68. The Respondents had been cultivating the said land continuously thereafter and had also been paying Chakota to the Central Govt.; and that neither the Appellant nor his alleged Predecessor Pritam Singh had ever any Right, Title or Interest in the said property, and that they had however, manipulated the Revenue records and changed the entries in the name of Pritam Singh, although the Fard Jamabandis in favour of Respondents had all along stood in their favour for the years 1974-75, 1979-80 and 1984-85. It was also contended that Pritam Singh could never have passed on possession of suit land to Appellant on the basis of any alleged affidavit or Agreement, since he himself was never in possession thereof.