Ravinder Kumar vs Gurbax Singh and Others

T.P.S. Mann, J.—Suit for possession filed by plaintiffs/respondents No. 1 to 4 and one Gurdeep Kaur was dismissed by the trial Court. However, first appeal filed by them was accepted by the lower appellate Court and the suit decreed. One, out of the two defendants, has preferred the present appeal u/s 100 of the CPC before this Court.

While decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, the lower appellate Court observed that during the pendency of the suit, field Kanungo was appointed as the Local Commissioner with a direction to demarcate khasra Nos. 1121 and 1131 and to report about any encroachment made upon khasra No. 1121 by the defendants. Though the report given by the field Kanungo was discarded by the trial Court on the ground that three pacca points were not fixed and no consolidation had taken place in the area yet while deposing before the trial court, the Halqa Kanungo admitted in his cross-examination that the demarcation was conducted from the pacca points and after the parties agreed to the pacca point, the demarcation was started.

When the demarcation had been started from two pacca points, it was possible to make correct demarcation in the khasra Nos. 1131 and 1121 which adjoined each other. After placing reliance upon the report of the field Kanungo, lower appellate Court found merit in the appeal of the plaintiff, and, accordingly, decreed the suit.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that no notice was issued to the defendants by the field Kanungo before undertaking the demarcation and, therefore, any demarcation made, could not be made binding upon them. It is not disputed that report Exhibit P-5 prepared by the field Kanungo was signed by one of the defendants i.e. Ravinder Kumar, who is the appellant in the present appeal. His stand that he had simply signed the report and had not consented to the demarcation, cannot be believed. The demarcation of the suit land was being made by the field Kanungo and the said demarcation could either make or mar the case of either party. Therefore, once the appellant was present at the time of demarcation and signed the demarcation report, he would be bound by the same.

In view of the above, no case is made out for any interference in the judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate Court, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs-respondents was decreed. The appeal is, thus, without any merit, and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.