Shri Gurbachan Singh and Others vs Shri Krishan Chand and Others

Sanjay Karol, J.—Plaintiffs-respondents herein filed a suit for possession by way of redemption of the suit land. Smt. Durgi Devi had mortgaged the same with Bhuri Singh, Bhagat Ram and Sant Ram. Durgi Devi gifted the land to Sant Ram, who in turn, sold it to the plaintiffs. Based on their title, plaintiffs filed a suit for possession by way of redemption.

Significantly, appellants (defendants before the trial Court) have admitted the plaintiffs'' title. Nonetheless, trial Court framed the following issues:-

Whether the plaintiffs have no locus standi to sue? OPP

Whether the parties are governed by custom in matters of succession and what is the custom? OP Parties.

Whether defendant No. 3 is one of the heirs of defendant No. 1? OPD-3

Whether Smt. Durgi was a limited owner of the property in suit? OPD

Whether defendant No. 1 turned un-chaste deserted her husband''s house or re-married? If so, to what effect?

Whether defendant No. 3 and other heirs of Durgi have been in adverse possession of the land in suit?

Whether the suit is within time?

Whether the suit is barred by the provisions of Order 2, Rule 2 C.P.C.?

Whether the plaintiffs are barred from bringing this suit by their act and conduct?

On what payment the plaintiffs are entitled to redeem the land in suit?

10-A Whether the suit property is ancestral qua Dasaundhi and the defendants No. 2 and 3? OPD-

Relief.

Appreciating the material so placed on record by the parties, trial Court decreed the suit deciding the questions of title and limitation in favour of the plaintiffs. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under:-

In view of my findings on the aforesaid issues a preliminary decree for possession of the suit land by redemption is passed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants with special costs of Rs. 500/-. The mortgaged amount of Rs. 772/- shall be paid by the plaintiffs within three months from the date of this judgment to the defendants in the following ratio:-

defendant No. 3=1/2, defendants No. 4 & 5=1/4th and defendant No. 6=1/4th, Decree sheet be prepared accordingly and the file after due completion be consigned to record room.

Decree and judgment dated 20.10.1997 passed by Senior Sub Judge, Una (H.P.), in Civil Suit No. 56/66/47/67/539/72, titled as Sh. Krishan Chand and others vs. Sh. Gurbachan Singh and others, stands affirmed by the lower appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 27.8.2003 in Civil Suit No. 16/2K/97, titled as Gurbachan Singh and others vs. Krishan Chand and others.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties as also perused the record so made available in Court, I am of the considered view that no question of law much less substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. More so, in view of the admitted factual matrix inter se the parties.

Plaintiffs'' title over the suit land stands admitted and proved on record. In any event, defendants have failed to establish their title over the suit land, by way of adverse possession. Animus hostile to that of true owner has neither been pleaded nor proved on record. Trial Court rightly held the suit to be within the period of limitation.

No other point is raised. As such, present appeal, devoid of merit, is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.