JASWANT SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS Vs. GIAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT , who was plaintiff before the trial Court, has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 6th November, 1996 of learned District Judge, whereby reversing the judgment and decree, dated 25th August, 1992 of learned trial Court, i.e. Sub Judge 1st Class, Amb, suit of the plaintiff -appellant has been dismissed.

(2.) FACTS relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be noticed. Plaintiff -appellant Jaswant, now dead and represented by his LRs, filed a suit for declaration that he was owner in possession of 3 Kanals 2 Marlas land bearing Khasra No.1817 and that the entries in the revenue papers, showing deceased Kalu, the predecessor of the defendants -respondents, as tenant of the said land under the plaintiff, were wrong, illegal and of no consequence, and the mutation, conferring the proprietary rights on said Kalu, which was attested, on the basis of said revenue entries, was illegal, void and of no effect on the rights of the plaintiff. It was pleaded that Kalu, the predecessor of the defendants -respondents had died in the year 1967 and that after his death his name was recorded as a tenant under the plaintiff, in the revenue papers, in the year 1972 and on the basis of that entry mutation of conferment of proprietary rights was attested. It was stated that since Kalu was dead, at the time when he was entered as tenant under the plaintiff, the question of entry being correct could not have been there and consequently the authorities, under the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, did not have jurisdiction to attest the mutation of conferment of proprietary rights.

(3.) TRIAL Court rejected defendants plea and concluded that Kalu was never a tenant under the plaintiff of the suit land and as such entries in the revenue papers, showing him as such, were wrong and illegal. It was also held that the order of the Land Reforms Officer, conferring the proprietary rights upon Kalu, the predecessor of the defendants -respondents, was also illegal, especially when Kalu was no more, when the entry was made in his favour and the mutation of conferment of proprietary rights was attested (date of the order of conferment of proprietary rights is 27th May, 1983). Consequently, suit was decreed.