Inder Singh (Since Deceased) and Another vs Babu Lal (Since Deceased) and Another

Surinder Gupta, J.—The plaintiff-Inder Singh (since deceased) represented by his LRs. and Sunder Singh, both sons of Ran Singh (now appellants) filed a suit challenging the order dated 20.11.1984 passed by the Collector, Kharar redeeming the land measuring 5 Bighas bearing Khewat/Khatauni No. 28, Khasra No. 85, situated in village Shafipur, Tehsil Kharar, District Mohali (now Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar) and further to restrain the defendants-Babu Singh and Ram Singh sons of Natha Singh from taking possession from the plaintiffs in execution of the order dated 20.12.1984. As per the plaintiffs'', the parties owned land at villages Shafipur and Ram Nagar. There was an exchange about 60 years before the filing of the suit, as a result of which the plaintiffs became owner of the land of village Shafipur, which included the suit land and defendants became owner of equivalent land at village Ram Nagar, Tehsil Rajpura. The defendants were left with no right, title or interest in the suit land, which was given to plaintiffs in exchange including the suit land, however, they moved an application for redemption of the suit land in Court of Collector, Kharar on 15.5.1984, which was allowed on 20.11.1984.

The defendants contested the claim of the plaintiffs and denied any exchange of land with the plaintiffs including the suit land.

The pleadings of the parties led to the framing of the following issues by the trial Court:-

(i) Whether the order dated 20.11.1984, passed by the Collector Kharar, redeeming the land in question void and illegal on the ground mentioned in the plaint? OPP

(ii) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the declaration as prayed for? OPP

(iii) Whether the plaintiff are entitled to the injunction prayed for? OPD

(iv) Relief.

Finding no merits, the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed and the first appeal filed before the Additional District Judge, Ropar also met the same fate.

Learned counsel for the appellants has been heard and file perused with his assistance.

Admittedly, the land situated in village Ram Nagar is recorded in the revenue record to be owned by the parties jointly. The appellants have alleged that the land of village Ram Nagar was given to the defendants in exchange. As per the entries in the revenue record, they (the appellants) have taken a loan from the Bank for the purchase of tractor by mortgaging the share of Inder Singh-appellant in the land situated at village Ram Nagar. The suit land was mortgaged for Rs. 500/- vide registered mortgage deed dated 28.6.1955 and the mutation was sanctioned on 28.7.1956. This belies the contention of plaintiffs that the exchange had taken place about 60 years before the filing of the suit (suit was filed on 16.7.1986). There is no document or evidence on file which could support the contention of the appellants that the suit land came to their share in exchange or the alleged exchange was ever admitted by the parties. In case, the land of Ram Nagar had been given to the defendant-respondents in exchange, the appellants would have not raised loan of Rs. 75,000 by mortgaging their land at village Ram Nagar, including the suit land with the bank and executed registered mortgage deed dated 28.6.1955 with regard to the suit land.

No legal or factual infirmity in concurrent finding of fact & law recorded by the learned Courts below has been pointed out. No question of law muchless substantial question of law, arises in this regular second appeal for consideration by this Court.

No merit. Dismissed.