BHAGAT SINGH Vs. SALIG RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant, who having lost before both the learned Courts below has filed the instant appeal.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the respondent/defendant (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) seeking declaration to the effect that the land comprised in Khewat No.291/272, Khatauni No. 321/302, Khasra Nos.945, 946, kitas 2, measuring 150-00 Sq. mtrs, situated in Muhal Khaliar/366/2, Tehsil Sadar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the suit land) is entered in the joint ownership and possession of the parties in the revenue record which is against the factual position and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. It was averred that the suit land was exclusively purchased by the plaintiff from one Sh. Khem Chand for consideration of Rs. 5,000/- vide registered Sale Deed No.521 dated 07.11.1973 and the possession of the suit land was also delivered only to the plaintiff and the name of the defendant was wrongly entered in the sale deed. It was further averred that the defendant neither paid the sale consideration nor was delivered possession of the suit land and his name was wrongly mentioned in the sale deed and a clarificatory affidavit was also filed by seller Sh.Khem Chand in this regard. Lastly, the plaintiff averred that several requests were made to the defendant to admit his claim, but in vain and on the basis of wrong entry the defendant is interfering in the suit land. Hence, the suit was filed.

(3.) The suit was resisted and contested by the defendant by filing written statement wherein preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, suppression of material facts, locus standi, court fee, jurisdiction and limitation, were taken. On merits, it was averred that vide order dated 16.02.2013 in File No.112/10, the suit land had been partitioned and the same was jointly purchased by them from Sh. Khem Chand after giving mutual sale consideration. Khem Chand was having link with the plaintiff and, therefore, fabricated false affidavit in support of the claim of the plaintiff. It was further averred that he had paid his half share Rs. 200/- against the advance to the vendor and thereafter paid Rs. 2300/- against the half share for the purchase of suit land and initiated partition proceedings with respect to the suit land against the plaintiff and in those proceedings, the plaintiff had also consented for the partition. It was also averred that the suit was filed by the plaintiff just to harass him and prayed for dismissal of the suit.