BALBIR SINGH Vs. CHUNI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present regular second appeal filed by the Plaintiff was admitted on the following substantial question of law: 1 Whether the lower appellate Court has erroneously applied the provisions of Section 171 of the H.P. Land Revenue Act by ignoring Section 37 and 46 of the said Act, thereby erroneously applying the ratio of the judgment of the Full Bench to the facts of the present case?

(2.) THE factual matrix giving rise to the present appeal can be summed up thus. The Plaintiff/Appellant had filed a suit against the predecessor -in -interest of the Defendants/Respondents (hereinafter referred to as the 'Defendants '), seeking Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? yes declaration to the effect that the order of partition made by the Assistant Collector First Grade, Jogindernagar dated 6.6.1988, directing the partition of the joint land between the parties as null and void and not binding on the rights of the Plaintiff. Consequently, Defendants were sought to be restrained from getting the land partitioned.

(3.) THE Defendants offered strong resistance to the suit filed by the Plaintiff and questioned the locus -standi of the Plaintiff to file the suit and also its maintainability, cause of action, estoppel vis -à - vis the non -joinder and mis -joinder of necessary parties. On merits denied the averments made in the plaint. It is contended that the land in the suit was partitioned with the consent of the Plaintiff 'sfather who was a co -sharer. His statement was also recorded to this effect by the revenue officers and the suit was filed by the Plaintiff only to harass and delay the proceedings of the partition.