HEMANT GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Court below, whereby the suit for possession on the basis of title was dismissed.
(2.) THE present suit is for possession of the land measuring 1 Bigha-10 Biswas comprising in Khasra No. 1479. Presently, the land is said to be comprised in Rect. No. 195, Khasra No. 27 (3-7) and Khasra No. 26 (2-4), total measuring 5 Kanals 11 marlas. It is the case of the plaintiff that Gurdwara Shri Teg Bahadur Sahib Patshahi Naumi, Jind (hereinafter referred to as the Gurdwara) is a scheduled Gurdwara mentioned at Sr. No. 341 of the first schedule to the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The consolidated list of property in terms of Section 3(2) of the Act was published on 21.9.1962. Since no claim by any one against the property mentioned in the notification was raised, another notification under Section 5(3) of the Act was published and, thus, the plaintiff is the owner of the land described above and is entitled to the possession. It was also pleaded that defendant Nos. 2 and 3 took illegal possession of this land in the year 1963. A suit was filed before the learned District Judge, Sangrur on 5.11.1963. The said suit was decreed on 6.12.1965 on the basis of the compromise with the said defendants. The possession was delivered to the plaintiff, but the Hindu Community of Jind raised hue and cry against the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land on 22.12.1965. The proceedings under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code were initiated. The property was attached by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jind. The matter was referred to the Senior Sub Judge, Jind for decision over the question of the possession. It was decided on 27.11.1972 by the learned Senior Sub Judge, Jind that the first defendant is in possession of the suit land. The possession was thereafter, delivered to the first defendant on 14.3.1973. The plaintiff, thereafter brought the present suit for possession under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963 alleging that defendant has no right to occupy the suit land.
(3.) ONLY defendant No. 1 contested the suit. The title of the plaintiff over the suit land was rebutted. It was pleaded that no notice was issued to it or to any other interested party with respect to the publication of notifications made under the Act. It took up a stand that the said defendant is in possession of the land for the last more than 50 years as owner. A Shiv Mandir, a Wrestling ground called Das Nami Akhara, numbers of rooms stand on the suit land. Various Sadhus come and stay there. The defendant Nos. 2 and 3 occupied this land for some times as agents of the first defendants. The compromise decree was said to be not binding upon the first defendant. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed in the suit :- "1. Whether Shri Pritam Singh and Shri Tarlochan Singh are authorized to file the present suit ? OPP. 2. Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the suit land ? OPP. 3. Whether the suit land is in adverse possession of defendant No. 1 for the last 15 years and if so, has he become owner of the same ? OPP. 4. Whether the defendants are estopped from raising any objection of any kind regarding the land in dispute in any Court of law ? OPP. 5. Whether the suit is bad for misjoinder of parties in defendants No. 2 and 3 ? OPP. 6. Whether the suit has not been properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction ? OPP. 7. Relief." ;