LAWS(HPH)-2012-4-59

KAUSHALYA Vs. DEHRO

Decided On April 09, 2012
KAUSHALYA Appellant
V/S
Dehro Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28.11.2011 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Chamba in Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2011.

(2.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that appellant -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff for convenience sake) filed a suit for declaration and injunction against respondents -defendants (hereinafter referred to as 'defendants for convenience sake) that Sh. Munshi Ram husband of the plaintiff was owner in possession of the land detailed in the plaint measuring 15 -9 -00 bighas situated in Mauza Sach, Tehsil and District Chamba and that defendant No.1, namely, Dehro is not owner in possession of the suit land as she is wife of one Sh. Dumanu Ram. She is completely stranger to the suit property. According to her, defendant No.1 in connivance with the revenue officials wrongly and illegally represented herself as wife of deceased Munshi Ram and got mutation No. 356 dated 11.9.1972 attested in her favour. Thereafter, she procured the revenue papers. She came to know about the wrong revenue entries. Revenue entries and mutation were challenged by respondents No. 2 and 3, namely, Chain Lal and Suti by way of civil suit bearing No. 266/95/93 and before the learned District Judge, Chamba in Civil Appeal No. 19/1996 as well as before this Court in RSA No. 50/1998. According to her, the mutation and judgments were not binding on her since she was not made party in these proceedings. She further pleaded that defendant No.1 sold the suit property to defendants No. 1 -A and 1 -B vide registered sale deeds dated 12.8.2004 and 29. 10.2004 and mutation Nos. 932 dated 18.9.2004 and No. 939 dated 9.3.2005 are illegal.The cause of action according to the plaintiff arose to her on 11.9.1972 when the wrong and illegal mutation was sanctioned during the month of August, 2002.

(3.) THE replication was filed to the written statement filed by the defendants. Issues were framed on 5.12.2005 and 5.4.2008. Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) dismissed the suit on 18.6.2011.Plaintiff preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Chamba. He also dismissed the same on 28.11.2011. Hence, the present Regular Second Appeal.