HARBANS SINGH Vs. KARTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present is a reference dated 26.8.1994 received from the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division U/s 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, recommending that the revision petition be partially accepted, so far it violates the sanctioned mode of partition regarding possession.

(2.) IN brief, the facts are that Harbans Singh made an application to the Tehsildar-cum-Collector, Ist Grade, Amritsar for the separation of his share from out of the land measuring 146K-11M situate at village Pakharpura, Tehsil and District Amritsar as recorded in the Jamabandi for the year 1982-83. However, it may be mentioned that the original application for the partition is not available on the record and seems to have been removed by someone with some ulterior motive. On this application, A.C. Ist Grade, Amritsar, decided that mode of partition as per his order dated 9.6.1987. Against this, respondents Kartar Singh etc. filed an appeal under Section 118(2) of the Act ibid (wrongly mentioned by the Collector as an appeal U/s 13 of the Act ibid) before the Collector, Amritsar, which was rejected as per the order of the Collector dated 7.9.1987. Thereafter, the Tehsildar-cum A.C. Ist Grade, Amritsar ordered the partition of the land as per his order dated 29.5.1990 Against this order, Harbans Singh filed an appeal before the Collector, Amritsar U/s 13 of the Act ibid, which was rejected by the Collector as per his order dated 7.1.1991. Against this order, Harbans Singh filed a revision petition (Harbans Singh has wrongly been shown as appellant in the Commissioner's order) before the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, who as per his reference dated 26th August, 1994 has reported the present case with his recommendation that the revision petition be partially accepted, so far it violates the sanctioned mode of partition, regarding possession. As recorded in the Commissioner's order, in this regard the main argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner-Harbans Singh was, that, the approved mode of partition was violated in this case, as the land comprised in Khasra No. 16/2/3, 16/2/2, 20/1/1 and 20/9 was in possession of the petitioner before the partition of the land, but after the partition some other co- sharers have also been allotted some land out of these Khasra numbers; and Khasra Number 53/12/2, 53/19, 53/13/1, 53/22 was not in his possession, but have been allotted to him now.

(3.) AGAINST the order of A.C. Ist Grade, Amritsar dated 29.5.1990, the Collector, Amritsar had rightly rejected the appeal of Harbans Singh, as per his order dated 17.1.1991, as the appeal was without any merit. However, the Commissioner (Appeals), Jalandhar Division has recommended the partial acceptance of the present revision made by Harbans Singh, without any sufficient cause, because if he had applied his mind to the position obtaining in the field, post-partition, he would have appreciated the nice job done by the Tehsildar, Amritsar and would have decided not to recommend the partial acceptance of this revision petition. The recommendation seems to have been made on the mere assertions of Harbans Singh.