SATISH KUMAR MITTAL,J - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of four Regular Second Appeals bearing R.S.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 and 2283 of 2006. These appeals are arising from four different suits filed by both the parties pertaining to the same property claiming cross relief against each other.
(2.) IN this case, Harbhajan Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant') sold 56 kanals of land being a co-sharer in the joint land to Mohinder Singh vide registered sale deed dated 3.11.2003 for a consideration of Rs. 42,00,000/-. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 34,00,000/- was paid by means of bank drafts and cheques which stood credited to the account of the defendant and the remaining amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- was paid to the defendant in cash before the Sub Registrar at the time of execution of the sale deed. The physical possession of 56 kanals of land, which was with defendant Harbhajan Singh under an arrangement with other co-sharers, was delivered to Mohinder Singh. Surjit Singh son of Harbhajan Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the second defendant') was the co-sharer in the joint khewat. However, defendant Harbhajan Singh sold 56 kanals of land to the extent of its half share in the khewat. Undisputedly, the sale by Harbhajan Singh was not beyond his share in the joint khewat. After the sale, a mutation was also sanctioned in favour of plaintiff Mohinder Singh. After the sale and sanction of the mutation, disputes arose between the parties with regard to the execution of the sale deed as well as possession of the suit land, as a result of which, the following four suits were filed by both the parties :- (a) Civil Suit No. 953 of 2003 for permanent injunction was filed by Surjit Singh against Mohinder Singh vendee and his father Harbhajan Singh to the effect that he is in possession of the land in dispute measuring 56 kanals under a registered 'Pattanama' dated 13.10.1998. Therefore, Mohinder Singh and Harbhajan Singh be restrained from interfering in his possession and further from forcibly dispossessing him from the suit land. (b) Civil Suit No. 440 of 2004 for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction was filed by Harbhajan Singh and his wife Surinder Kaur against Mohinder Singh claiming that they are in actual physical and cultivating possession of the suit land being owners and the sale deed dated 3.11.2003 and the mutation are the result of fraud, forgery misrepresentation and without consideration and the same are illegal, null and void and not binding on their rights. (c) Civil Suit No. 929 of 2003 for declaration filed by Mohinder Singh against Harbhajan Singh and his wife Surinder Kaur to the effect that writing dated 8.11.2003, which was got signed from him in the Police Station by exercise of coercion, undue influence, use of force extortion is null and void and not binding on his right, with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from giving effect to the said writing. (d) Civil Suit No. 491 of 2005 for permanent injunction was filed by Mohinder Singh against Harbhajan Singh and his son Surjit Singh restraining them from forcibly dispossessing him from the suit land.
(3.) THOUGH all the four suits were tried in the same court, but were decided vide separate judgments. The suits filed by Surjit Singh, Harbhajan Singh and his wife Surinder Kaur were dismissed by the trial court and the suits filed by Mohinder Singh against Harbhajan Singh and his son Surjit Singh, and against Harbhajan Singh and his wife Surinder Kaur, were decreed. The four appeals filed against the judgment and decree of the trial Court by Surjit Singh, Harbhajan Singh and Surinder Kaur have also been dismissed by the first Appellate Court. Against the judgment and decree passed by the courts below in these four suits, the instant four Regular Second Appeals have been filed.;