UTTAM SINGH Vs. DES RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed aginst the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Ropar, dated 24th December, 1988, whereby, the judgment and decree dated 2nd June, 1988, passed by the Sub-Judge 1st Class, Anandpur Sahib, against the plaintiff-respondent was set aside, and, the suit of the plaintiff was decreed with costs throughout.

(2.) DES Raj, plaintiff filed the present suit on the averments; that since the death of his father Nankoo, he is in possession of the suit land as an owner, and, prior to that his father was owner in possession of the, suit land, which, was donated to him (Nankoo) by Raja Ram, original owner of the suit land. It was further pleaded that in the Jamabandis prior to 1983-84, entries concerning possession where in favour of Des Raj, or, his father Nankoo as a tenant Bita Lagan Bawajah Dharam Arth. It was also pleaded thatuttam Singh, defendant-appellant, in connivance with the revenue officials got these entries changed by deleting the name of the plaintiff* and, instead wrong entry as Khudkashi Magbuza Malak was made in the Jamabandi for the year 1983-84. ,,. On the basis of the said entry the defendant threatened to forcibly dispossess the plaintiff

(3.) THE defendant in his written statement denied that the landin-dispute was donated by Paja Ram to Mankoo, or, that Nankoo, or, the plaintiff remained in possession of the suit-land as a tenant. It was also pleaded that some land, including the land-in-suit, was sold by Raja Ram in favour of the defendant, for a sum of Rs. 500/vide registered sale-deed, dated 2nd December, 1963. and, since then he had been in. possession of the land in suit as its owner. 4 From the pleadings of the parties; following issues were framed : "1. Whether the suit land was "donated by Raja Ram to the father of the plaintiff about 50/60 years back and delivered the possession to him ? O. P. P. 2. Whether after the death of Nankoo, the plaintiff is coming in possession of the suit land and is entitled to the injunction preyed for? O. P. P. 3. Whether Raja Ram sold the suit land in favour of the defendant vide sale deed dated 2-12-1963? O. P. D.