CHARAN DASS Vs. DEVTA THAKUR GOPALJI SARSAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13.5.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu in Civil Appeal No.13 of 2009.

(2.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff' for convenience sake) sought declaration to the effect that the plaintiff being deity is the owner in possession of the suit land measuring 0-40-59 hectares bearing Khasra Nos. 511/1, 584, 585 and 772 (previous Khasra Nos. 4530 and 4397) comprised in Khata/Khatauni No. 545/764, as recorded in the copy of jamabandi for the year 2003-04, Up- Muhal Ranghri, Tehsil and District Kullu and mutation No. 4043 dated 6.8.1984 has been wrongly attested and sanctioned. Appellants-defendants, who were arrayed as defendants No.3 and 4 in original suit filed separate written statement. Appellant- defendant Charan Dass took preliminarily objection regarding lack of maintainability, locus standi and that the suit was collusive between Surinder Kumar and defendant No.2 (Smt. Maina Devi). It was claimed that he was the personal deity of one family of village Sarsai. It was also asserted that Surinder Kumar was having no authority to institute the suit. The Pujaris used to perform Puja and they used to pay donation to Devta. This fact is also recorded in Waz-ib-ul-arz of Phati and Kothi Naggar. The mutation was rightly attested by the Revenue Officer in the presence of Kardar of Devta. It was specifically denied that the interest of Devta was not watched properly. Defendant No.2 (Smt. Maina Devi) was present at the time of attestation of mutation. Defendant Charan Dass had exchanged the land after satisfying himself about the title of defendant No.1 Smt. Ketki Devi. The suit land was found in possession of Charan Dass and mutation No. 7079 dated 18.8.2000 was attested by Assistant Collector IInd Grade. He had developed the land, raised boundary wall and apple orchard by spending huge amount. Kekti had rightly sold Khasra No. 3323 to Begmu Devi. Begmu Devi (defendant No.4), in original suit, has filed separate written statement. It was averred therein that Surinder Kumar had no authority to institute the suit and the suit was collusive between him and Maina Devi. It was asserted that Surinder Kumar was not Pujari of the Deity and he was having no authority to institute the suit. The mutation of conferment of proprietary right was rightly sanctioned. She had purchased part of Khasra No. 3323 from Kekti vide sale deed No. 610 dated 16.5.1985 for valuation consideration of ' 13,000/-. She was in possession over the suit land and has developed the same by raising boundary wall and orchard after spending huge amount. Inquires were made by her regarding the title of the land of Kekti and after verifying the title of Kekti. Therefore, she was bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration. She sold the land in favour of Bala Ram and Bala Ram transferred the land to Kehar Singh and Hira Lal-defendants No. 6 and 7, in original suit. The replications were filed and the issues were framed by the trial court on 12.7.2006. The trial court decreed the suit on 17.1.2009. Defendant No.3 Charan Dass and defendant No.4 Begmu filed an appeal bearing Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2009 against the judgment dated 17.1.2009 before the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu. Learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu dismissed the appeals vide judgment and decree dated 13.5.2010. Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal.

(3.) MR. Anand Sharma and MR. Jagan Nath, Advocates have supported the judgments and decrees passed by both the courts below. MR. Bimal Gupta has supported the contentions of MR. S.K. Khanna.