LAWS(HPH)-2015-12-52

RASALU RAM Vs. BALDEV SINGH AND ORS.

Decided On December 03, 2015
Rasalu Ram Appellant
V/S
Baldev Singh and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal has been instituted against judgment dated 22.3.2014 rendered in Civil Appeal No. 139 -G/2013/2003 by the learned Additional District Judge -(II), Kangra at Dharamshala, Circuit court at Dehra, District Kangra, HP.

(2.) "Key facts" necessary for adjudication of the present appeal are that the respondents -original applicants preferred an application against the appellant -defendant under Sec. 144 CPC for restoration of the possession of the land in question and also for recovery of mesne profits of Rs. 1,25,000/ -. According to the averments made in the application, respondents by way of registered sale deed dated 16.9.1971 had purchased 1600/3686 shares of land as detailed in the application, vide sale deed dated 16.9.1971 from Raj Devi for a consideration of Rs. 12,000/ -. Appellant filed a Civil Suit No. 93/1972 for pre -emption and said civil suit was decreed by the learned Sub Judge Dharamsala vide judgment and decree dated 25.9.1975. Respondents filed an appeal before the District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala. Appeal was dismissed. Respondents then filed Regular Second Appeal bearing RSA No. 66/1976 before this Court against the judgment and decree of Sub Judge as well as District Judge. Regular Second Appeal was allowed by this Court on 21.4.1986. Appellant thereafter filed an SLP before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which was dismissed on 9.1.1995. Respondents were entitled to get back the possession of the suit land in question by restoration.

(3.) Application was contested by the appellant. According to him, possession of the land in question did not pass on to the respondents after sale deed in their favour by Raj Devi, mother of appellant. It was in his exclusive possession. Issues were framed by the learned Sub Judge Kangra at Dharamshala. He allowed the application on 21.6.2003. Appellant -respondent filed an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge. He dismissed the appeal on 22.3.2014. Hence, this appeal.