Kuldeep Singh vs Nasib Kaur and Others

Paramjeet Singh, J.—Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 22.08.2013 (Annexure P/8) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Malerkotla, whereby petitioner-plaintiff has been directed to pay the court fee on the market value of the land. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that earlier sale deed No. 2917 dated 29.11.2004 was executed by respondents-defendants no. 1 and 2 in favour of respondents-defendants no. 3 and 4. Thereafter, the petitioner has purchased the land from respondents-defendants no. 3 and 4 vide sale deed No. 2365 dated 28.09.2005. The petitioner is seeking rectification of khasra numbers which have been mentioned in the sale deed which was executed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 in favour of respondent nos. 3 and 4 and respondent nos. 3 and 4 in favour of the petitioner.

I have considered the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

Admittedly, the earlier sale deed executed between defendants inter se was concerning same very khasra numbers for which the petitioner is seeking rectification. Apparently, respondent nos. 3 and 4 have not approached the Court for rectification. Now, the petitioner seeks the rectification of the earlier sale deed which was between respondent nos. 1 and 2 and respondent nos. 3 and 4; the petitioner must have purchased the property looking at the earlier documents. Virtually, it will amount to cancellation of the earlier sale deeds as new khasra numbers are to be brought in. This tantamounts to, in fact, challenging the earlier sale deeds executed by original owner i.e. defendant nos. 1 and 2 in favour defendant nos. 3 and 4 where allegedly the wrong khasra numbers have been mentioned. Thereafter, alleged rectification can be effected with regard to sale deed between the petitioner and respondent nos. 3 and 4. Mere clever drafting of pleadings cannot change the nature of relief claimed. Virtually, the relief is for cancellation of the sale deeds.

In view of this, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Dismissed.