JUDHIA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of two appeals filed by the Appellants Judhia Devi etc. and one filed by State of H.P. under Section 100 Code of Civil Procedure against the common judgment and decree, dated 1.8.2000, passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla, H.P., ]modifying the judgment and decree dated 18.11.1997 passed by the learned Sub Judge (3), Shimla, vide which he had decreed the suit of the Appellant/plaintiffs partly for declaration as well as for confirmation of possession and granting the relief of permanent injunction.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the original Plaintiff Devi Ram, now represented by Appellants Judhia Devi and Ors. hereinafter also referred to as the Plaintiffs, filed a suit for declaration, confirmation of possession and injunction as against Respondent No. 1 State, hereinafter referred to as Defendant No. 1, and Respondent No. 2, hereinafter also referred to as Defendant No. 2. The allegations made by the original Plaintiff Devi Ram were that he was the grandson of Mohlu. The pedigree table of late Mohlu is given as under:

(3.) IT was further alleged that the suit land was in 'Dhami State '. Before the merger of States in the Union of India, Shri Dalip Singh was the Raja of Dhami in 1930 -40 and he remained as such till the merger of States in the Union of India. The said Raja of Dhami, by an order, expelled Lachhoo out of Dhami State somewhere in the year 1939 -40 and ordered the forfeiture of property of Lachoo in his favour. Thus, Raja of Dhami became owner in possession of the share of Lachoo. Raja of Dhami stepped into the shoes of Lachhoo for all rights and liabilities of property of Lachoo. Thus, he became the owner/mortgagor of land measuring 5 bighas and 13 biswas and full owner of remaining land of the share of Lachhoo.