- (1.) Pleading that the partition in this case was ordered in complete violation of mode of partition which was approved by this court, the petitioners have approached this Court to challenge the order of partition passed in this case and upheld by various authorities in chain.
(2.) As per the petitioners, 18 marlas land out of 6 kanals 5 marlas, which was in the possession and occupation of the petitioners, is ordered to be divided into two tuks, which is in violation of the mode of partition (Annexure P-2). The petitioners have placed on record the site plan showing the land, which was earlier in their possession and that of the private respondents. They have further annexed a site plan showing the land which is now given to the petitioners and respondents after partition. From this, the petitioners would allege that 85% possession of the petitioners has been disturbed, which would be in violation of Clause 6 and 7 of the mode of partition.
(3.) Husband of petitioner No.1 had purchased 6 kanals 5 marlas land from Jasbir Singh, who was owner and was also having attorney on behalf of Gurpreet Singh and Paramjit Singh. The petitioners claim to have been put in possession of specific khasra numbers on the basis of this sale deed 6.8.1991. Jasbir Singh etc. sold the remaining land measuring 34 kanals 2 marlas to Mohinder Singh, Balhar Singh, Karnail Singh and Harbhajan Singh in the year 1992. The petitioners have raised some construction on the land purchased by them on which they were put in possession.;