LAL SINGH DIDAR SINGH Vs. GURU GRANTH SAHIB AND ORS.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Lal Singh Didar Singh
Guru Granth Sahib And Ors.
Click here to view full judgement.
Kartar Singh Campbellpuri, J. -
(1.) THE facts & circumstances which led to this protracted litigation may shortly be stated as follows:
(2.) BY a registered deed dated 29 -9 -1977 Atma Rarn: & Hari Das, Chelas of Kahan Das sold agricultural land measuring 29 bighas & 3 biswas situated in village Dooburji tehsil Payal in favour of Dulla & Radhawa. Lal Singh pltf. -applt. filed a suit for possession by preemption wherein it was stated in the very first Para, of the plaint that the property related to a Dera & the vendors Atma Ram & Hari Das were not competent to alienate the property. In the column of relief it was, however, prayed that a decree for possession by pre -emption be granted in his favour on payment of Rs. 1,580 the amount which was actually paid. The record reveals that a decree was granted in favour of Lal Singh on 30 -4 -1981 & in pursuance of the decree the applt. entered into possession of the property on 25 -12 -1981 but it so transpired that soon after this an order was issued from the office of the Deorhi Mualla that the property in question was the property of a Dera & an entry in the revenue record be made accordingly. In pursuance of this order emanating from Deorhi Mulla the proceedings were started by the revenue authorities against Lal Singh & he was actually dispossessed on 30 -2 -1986. This suit for possession was instituted by Lal Singh a decade after on 12 -8 -1996 & it was alleged inter alia that he was the owner of the property & had been wrongfully dispossessed. The suit was resisted by the Committee in charge of the Dara & it was contended that the property belonged to the religious institution & that Atma Ram & Hari Das were only the Managers on behalf of the Dera Udasian situated in village Dooburji & as such they were not competent to alienate the property in favour of Dulla & Badhawa & consequently the pltf. too who was succossore in interest of the original vendees could not derive any title sheer by getting a decree for pre -emption. The pleadings gave rise to the following issues:
1. Is the suit within time? O.P.
2. Has the Ct. no jurisdiction to try & decide the suis?
Is the pltf. owner of the land & therefore entitled to get its possession & to get the entries in the revenue record corrected?
(3.) IS Sardar Sahib Deorhi Mualla a necessary party to this suit, it so, what is the effect of his not being impleaded?;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.