DHANI RAM SON OF BIRBAL Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that petitioner had instituted civil suit in the court of Sub-Judge 1st Class (1), Kangra bearing Civil Suit No.134 of 1988 for declaration to the effect that he was in exclusive possession as co-owner over the land comprising Khata No. 120/min/110 Red Harra, Khatauni No. 228, Khasra No. 413 measuring 0-11-96 hectares. According to him, entry made in favour of respondent No.2 as Gair Maurushi tenant over this khasra number was contrary to the spot position. According to him, the same was liable to be changed in his favour. Suit was contested by respondent No.2. According to him, he was in possession of the suit land, including other khasra numbers and has become owner in possession of the suit land after the enactment of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. Learned trial court framed the following issues on 16.11.1988:

(2.) Trial Court on issues No. 7 and 8 held that the petitioner has failed to prove the exclusive possession of the suit land and that the entry in the revenue record was illegal; unauthorized and was liable to be erased. These two issues were decided against the petitioner and in favour of respondent No.2. As far as issue No.6 is concerned, learned Sub-Judge 1st Class held that respondent No.2 was in possession of the suit land and has become owner by virtue of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. Leaned Sub-Judge 1st Class dismissed the suit preferred by the petitioner on 31.7.1990. He preferred an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Kangra bearing Civil Appeal No. 75/ 1991. The same was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge on 28.4.1993. Thereafter, petitioner moved an application before the Land Reforms Officer, Kangra on 26.10.1994. The same was transferred to the L.R.O. Shahpur in the year 1997. He passed the order in favour of the petitioner on 27.9.1999 vide Annexure P-l. Petitioner had also filed Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.4.1993 bearing R.S.A. No. 219/1993. The'same was dismissed by this Court on 3.11.1999.

(3.) It will be pertinent to note at this stage that on the basis of order passed by the L.R.O. Shahpur dated 27.9.1999, mutation No. 826 was attested in favour of the petitioner on 28.12.1999. Respondent No.2 preferred an appeal assailing the order dated 27.9.1999 and attestation of mutation on 28.12.1999 before the Collector (A.D.M.) by appeal No. 118/2000. The same was allowed by him on 8.7.2002. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner by way of appeal No. 193/2002. The Divisional Commissioner dismissed the same on 28.9.2010. The revision preferred by the petitioner before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals) bearing Revision Petition No. 29/ 2011 was also dismissed on 3.6.2011.