NAND LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal, stands, directed, against, the concurrently recorded verdicts, hence, by both the learned Courts below, wherethrough, the plaintiff's suit for rendition, of, a declaratory decree, for, setting aside Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? mutation bearing No. 199, and, mutation No.237, wherethrough, the suit land was respectively vested, in, the Gram Panchayat, and, in the State of Himachal Pradesh, rather stood dismissed.

(2.) Now the plaintiff/appellant herein, has instituted the instant Regular Second Appeal, before, this Court, wherein he assails the findings, recorded in its impugned judgment and decree, by the learned first Appellate Court. When the appeal came up for admission, this Court, on 30.09.2004, admitted the appeal instituted by the plaintiff/appellant, against, the judgment and decree, rendered by the learned first Appellate Court, on, the hereinafter extracted substantial questions of law:-

(3.) The strived for declaratory decree(s), for, nullifying the attestation, of, mutation No.199, and, mutation No.237, wherethrough, the suit land, was, respectively ordered to vest, in, the Gram Panchayat, assigned hereinafter and, in the State of H.P., is/are, for the reasons to be hence amenable, for, being accorded, (i)given the revenue entires borne in the revenue records appertaining, to, the suit khasra numbers, and, also appertaining, to, the phase/era, prior to the recording, of, the afore mutations, and, respectively borne in Ex. P-4, exhibit whereof, is, a jamabandi, appertaining, to, the suit kahsra number, and, appertaining to the year 1915, (ii) and, borne in Ex.P-9, exhibit whereof, is, a jamabandi appertaining, to, the year 1954-55, besides appertains to the suit khasra numbers,(iii) rather making clear, graphic unfoldings, vis- a-vis, the suit land becoming described, in, the column of ownership, as, "Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasab Araji Khewat", and, in the column of possession thereof, the, predecessor-in-interest, of, the plaintiff, one Girdhari standing recorded, to be, holding possession thereof. The afore entries existing, in, the afore alluded jamabandis, appertaining to the phase, prior, to, the recording of the afore mutations, do, all carry, a presumption truth, (iv) unless the afore presumption truth carried by the afore entires, is, rebutted, through adduction, of, cogent evidence, (v) and, whereas, for, want, of, cogent adduced rebuttal evidence, whereupon, they would rather acquire, an, aura of conclusivity, and, also would become amenable, for, completest reliance being placed thereon. Since, the requisite rebuttal evidence remains unadduced, thereupon, all the afore entries carry, an, aura of conclusivity. The effects thereof, is, qua thereon(s), hence, the mandate, of, the apposite provisions borne, in Section 4, of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, becoming attracted, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter:-