JASWANT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above mentioned three regular second appeals i.e. RSA Nos. 319 of 2009, 102 of 2010 and 5091 of 2010 have been listed together for hearing as these arise out of a common judgment and decree of the Court of first instance as well as of lower appellate Court. As such, all the above mentioned second appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) THE aforementioned three second appeals have been preferred by the appellants -plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 17.11.2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, whereby judgment and decree dated 09.08.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Gurgaon partly decreeing the suit of the appellantsplaintiffs has been set aside and suits of the plaintiffs have been dismissed. For convenience sake, hereinafter parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Court of first instance in Civil Suit No. 285 of 1994 from which RSA No. 319 of 2009 has arisen i.e. appellants as plaintiffs and respondents as defendants.

(3.) THE detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, brief facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are to the effect that one Smt. Sharbati Devi widow of Bhikhu son of Deen Dayal was owner in possession of agricultural land detailed in para no. 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c) of the plaint. It has been alleged that said Smt. Sharbati died in the year 1964 and she was succeeded by her sole heir Smt. Chandan Devi and mutation of inheritance No. 445 was sanctioned on 17.09.1965 in her name Chandan Devi was succeeded by her four sons, namely, Jugal Kishore, Madan Lal, Shanti Sarup and Mohinder Singh and one daughter namely, Smt. Sumitra, as a result of which the heirs of Chandan Devi became small land owners. The said land was never utilized during the life time of Smt. Chandan Devi. The land in question does not vest in the State of Haryana in view of Section 10 -A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act. It has further been averred that the land was purchased by the plaintiffs in the year 1971 -72 and in the year 1986 from the legal heirs of Smt. Chandan Devi. Since the said purchase, the plaintiffs have been in continuous possession over the land in question and mutations have also been sanctioned. It has further been averred that previously defendant no.3 was the tenant who was subsequently evicted vide order dated 20.08.1971. It has further been averred that defendant nos. 1 and 2 secretly and without notice to the plaintiffs have got the land transferred in their favour vide mutation No. 1949 which was sanctioned on 12.11.1991, the same is illegal and null and void. Order declaring the land surplus and subsequent mutations are null and void. No notice of the mutation was given to the plaintiffs. Hence suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction and possession was filed.