MEHAR SINGH Vs. SHAKUNTALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit of the plaintiff/respondent herein (for short "the plaintiff") for rendition of a decree, for permanent prohibitory injunction, besides for rendition of a decree, for declaration, and, in the alternative for rendition of a decree for possession of the suit land, stood dismissed by the learned trial Court. In an appeal carried therefrom, before the learned First Appellate Court, by the plaintiff, the latter Court allowed the appeal besides obviously reversed the trial Court's judgment and decree, hence, the instant appeal.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit to the effect that the land bearing Khata No. 23, Khatauni No. 28, Khasra Nos. 754, 937, 940, 948, 984, 986, 1017, 1070, 1072, 1073, 1074, 1076, 1078 and 1087 Kita 14 measuring 3-57-27 hectares as entered in the copy of the Jamabandi for the year 1994- 95 Ex. P-2 on record situated in Mohal Ram Beh, Tehsil Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. is recorded in the ownership of the plaintiff to the extent of 1/4th share. In the name of Bir Singh to the extent of share and in the name of defendant-appellant herein (for short the defendant) Mehar Singh to the extent of 1/4th share and the same is jointly recorded in the possession of all the co-sharers. Similarly, the land bearing Khata No. 24, Khatauni No. 29, Khasra Nos. 743, 744 and 745 Kita 3 measuring 3-65-89 hectares entered in the jamabandi for the year 1994-95 Ex.P-2 is recorded in the ownership of the plaintiff-appellant to the extent of 1/8th share. In the ownership of defendant to the extent of 1/6th share and also in the ownership and possession of other co-sharers. It is averred that the plaintiff is owner in possession of the suit land and is entitled t remain as such in future also. The defendant has got no right, title or interest in the same. The plaintiff is an old, illiterate and blind lady and also rustic villager.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant and he has filed written statement, wherein, he has taken preliminary objections of no cause of action to file the suit, the suit is not within time, the plaintiff is estopped by her act and conduct to file the suit and that the suit has not been properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction.