TARSEM SINGH Vs. ARUN KUMAR SINGH & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed, against, the concurrently recorded verdicts by both the learned Courts below, whereby, the plaintiff's suit for declaration and for permanent prohibitory injunction AND in the alternative for possession of the suit khasra number, was, hence dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction with the averments that plaintiff is exclusive owner in possession of land measuring 0-23-32 hectares, comprised in Khewat No. 163, Khatauni NO. 264, at present Khasra No. 1349, 1354 and 1356 as entered in the jamabandi for the year 1996-97 situated in Mahal Jindbar, Mahal Ambota, Tehsil Amb, District Una, H. P. and order dated 14. 7. 1999 passed by the Settlement Collector is wrong and illegal as well as without jurisdiction having no effect upon the right, title or interest of the plaintiff qua the suit land. The plaintiff also assailed the mutation No. 138 dated 7. 9. 1999 sanctioned on the basis of the said order with permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the suit land in any manner whatsoever and cutting and removing any valuable trees from the suit land. In the alternative the suit for possession. According to the plaintiff, the defendants are utter strangers having no right, title or interest over the suit land. The order dated 14. 7. 1999 described above was passed without affording opportunity to the plaintiff as such the same is null and void. Now the defendants, on the basis of the aforesaid illegal order, about a month back threatened to take forcible possession of the suit land and also to cut sheesham tree standing over the suit land, the defendants were requested a number of times not to hurl such threats but of no use, hence, the suit.

(3.) The defendants contested the suit and filed written statement, wherein, they have taken preliminary objections inter alia maintainability, jurisdiction, esptoppel, plaintiff not approaching the court with clean hands. It has been averred that the suit land comprised in khasra No. 1349/1, measuring 0-00-72 is part of old khasra No. 4905 min which is owned and possessed by the defendants. On merits, the defendants denied the most of the averments made in the plaint. However, it has not been disputed that during consolidation operation khasra No. 4895 and 4901 were carved out in lieu of old Khasra No. 5031 min, 5032 min and 7757/5030 to which the defendants have no concern. In fact, the plaintiff during the course of consolidation, got changed the meterkans of the new khasra number and when defendants came to know about this mischief the defendants moved an application for correction of the same. The Settlement Collector, Kangra sent application of the defendants for inquiry to Naib Tehsildar, Amb, who after giving notice to the parties submitted a detailed report. Resultantly, the order dated 14. 7. 1999 was passed in favour of the defendants. It is clear from the said order that land measuring 0-00-45 hects comprised in Khasra No. 1349/1 is in fact part of old khasra No. 4905. Thus, the plaintiff has no right, title or interest.