BHIM DUTT AND ORS. Vs. RAM KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants are in second appeal before this Court. They are aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and decree dated 1.4.1999, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan in Civil Appeal No. 53 -N/13 of 1998. As a matter of fact, learned Additional District Judge vide judgment and decree under challenge while setting aside the judgment and decree passed by learned Sub Judge, Rajgarh in Civil Suit No. 31/1 of 1998/89 has decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff Ram Krishan (since dead) predecessor -in -interest of respondent No. 1(a), for the relief of declaration and injunction.

(2.) The findings that the relief claimed by the plaintiff has arisen from one common transaction and that deceased Sarup Devi having already sold the land to the deceased plaintiff are stated to be erroneous, hence, resulted into miscarriage of justice to the appellants -defendants. Said Smt. Sarup Devi allegedly was a necessary party and the decree for declaration could have not been passed in her absence. The entries in the revenue record showing said Smt. Sarup Devi owner of the suit land were misread and mis -appreciated. She sold 13.5 bighas of land to appellants -defendants and even mutation also sanctioned and attested in their names, however, the same has also not been appreciated. Also that the lower appellate Court allegedly failed to appreciate the niceties of law qua non -joinder of parties and necessary parties.

(3.) The appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law: