SAT PAUL Vs. CHANAK RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE trial court while deciding the preliminary issue held that the Civil court had the jurisdiction to try the matter pending before it which was not barred under any provision of law. It is submitted that the Court below has wrongly decided the issue in favour of the respondent -plaintiff and ignored the relevant provisions of the J&K Evacees (Administration of property) Act herein after referred to as the Act).

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the passing of the order impugned are: that the respondent -plaintiff filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction in the trial court with prayer for restraining the defendant -petitioner from interfering in his peaceful possession over the land comprising Khasra No. 205 (1 Kanal) situate in village Gagian, Tehsil R.S. Pora. It was alleged that father of the plaintiff and grandfather of the defendant were displaced persons and closely related to each other. The father of the plaintiff was stated to have been allotted land including Khasra No. 16 While the grandfather of the defendant was alloted land including Khasra No. 205 situated in the same village. It was further contended that by mutual consent both the parties had exchanged the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 16 and 205 and possession taken by each other. As the defendant threatened to forcibly dispose the plaintiff, he filed a suit with prayer as noted herein. The defendant denied the exchange of the allotted land and submitted that the plaintiff was in illegal possession of the disputed property. It was submitted that the civil court had no jurisdiction as there was no valid exchange in terms of Cabinet order No. 578 -C of 1954. The provisions of section 15 and 31 of the Act were alleged to have been violated. The trial court framed a preliminary issue on 30 -4 -1992 and decided the same against the defendant vide the judgment impugned in this revision petition.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.