SOHAN LAL Vs. AMIN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 27.02.2002, passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P. in Civil Appeal No. 111 of 1999.

(2.) Material facts necessary for adjudication of this appeal are that the appellant-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff' for the sake of convenience), had filed a suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondent/proforma respondent/defendants (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendants' for the sake of convenience). The suit was originally filed against Shri Brij Lal, father of defendant No. 1, now represented by his legal representatives, Shri Amin Chand and Shri Tulsi Ram, who were impleaded as proforma defendants. According to the plaintiff, the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 85, 113, 115 and 120, measuring 0-05-83 hectares, situated in village Luharda was recorded in the ownership and possession of defendant No. 1 in the revenue record. According to the plaintiff, the suit land was purchased by the plaintiff, original defendant No. 1 and proforma defendant by way of oral sale in 1969 from one Krishan Dass, for a consideration of Rs. 1600/- jointly and the consideration was paid by all the parties, who were put in possession, but the mutation was wrongly sanctioned in favour of the original defendant No. 1 on 14.07.1969 and the revenue entries were entered solely in the name of defendant wrongly which are liable to be corrected.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant, Amin Chand. According to him, the suit land was purchased by his father, Brij Lal exclusively, who was in possession of the same and no objections were raised with regard to the entries during consolidation also, which took place in the year 1975-76. The defendant was owner-in-possession of the suit land and mutation was rightly attested in the name of his father in 1969.