NOOP RAM Vs. COLLECTOR, KULLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant before this Court filed a suit for declaration against the defendants on the plea that Rai of Rupi Shri Mahinder Singh had granted Nautor, measuring 16-?2-?0 bighas, vide Patta No.128 of Phati Manjhli Kothi Kotkandi, Tehsil and District Kullu, H.P. at place " Udu-?Ra-? Banala", on 01.06.1972 as per tatima prepared by Halqua Patwari on 04.06.1972.

(2.) As per the plaintiff, though power to grant Nautor by Rai of Rupi ceased in the year 1957, yet process of issuing Pattas continued till 1973, when the matter was finally settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court and thereafter a scheme for regularization of Pattas issued upto 1973 was framed. The possession of the plaintiff was on the spot. Patta was issued to him on 21.06.1972 by Rai of Rupi. Mutation was entered as per this Patta in favour of the plaintiff. The matter was pending before defendant No.2 and enquiry was also being conducted. In the course of the said enquiry, on 20.02.2000, Naib-?Tehsildar Kullu, visited the spot and found plaintiff in possession of the suit land. Thereafter, plaintiff inquired about the proceedings from defendant No.2, but in vain. He issued a notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, however despite this, defendants failed to do the needful. Accordingly, in these circumstances, plaintiff filed the suit for declaration, praying for the following relief:-?

(3.) By way of written statement, defendants contested the case. They took the stand that though, plaintiff was granted Patta of the suit land by Rai of Rupi on 21.06.1072, but neither any date was mentioned on the Tatima nor the same was signed by the Patwari concerned. As per the defendants, mutation was not entered in the revenue record due to non completion of formalities at the behest of the plaintiff. It was further their case that as per the policy framed by the government, spot inquiry was conducted by the joint team of Revenue and Forest Departments. It was also the case of the defendants that the proceedings qua the case of the plaintiff were under consideration for the proposed regularization.