- (1.) The parties litigate in regard to the land from the inheritance of Buta deceased who died sometime before January 21, 1922. On his death the land was inherited by his widow Sobhi and the copy of the mutation entry in this respect is Exhibit P-3. On June 17, 1940, Sobhi effected a mortgage of the land for Rs. 499/- in favour of Ram Rakhi defendant 1. Copy of the mutation entry is Exhibit P-2. The mutation about the mortgage in favour of the defendant 1 was attested by the Revenue Officer on March 30, 1941. On the death of Sobhi, mutation of the land was entered in the name of Santi plaintiff, as the daughter of Khazan Singh uncle of Buta deceased. The copy of the mutation entry is Exhibit P-1. The report, dated May 30, 1960, on it shows that she had died some six years earlier, which means that she died sometime in 1954. So she died before the coming into force on June 17, 1956, of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (Act 30 of 1956). On this entry a pedigree-table is given as below :- While this mutation was pending decision, some of the proprietors of the village, Kakrala, within the estate of which the land in question is situate, sold this land to Bhagwan Singh defendant 2, son of Ram Rakhi defendant 1. The sale-deed is Exhibit D-1, and it was executed on June 16, 1954, which also affirms the statement, as above, that Sobhi died sometime in 1954 and obviously before June 16, 1954.
(2.) The mutation entry was made in the name of Santi plaintiff as the daughter of Khazan Singh and thus the cousin of Buta deceased, husband of Sobhi deceased. The copy of it, Exhibit P-1, does not give the date of the report of the Patwari, but there is a report of another officer, dated August 29, 1959, on it. It came for consideration of the Revenue Officer on May 30, 1960, reference to which date has already been made above. After that it was finally sanctioned by the Revenue Officer on October 14, 1961, in favour of Santi plaintiff. At that time, of the proprietors who sold the land under the sale-deed, Exhibit D-1, to defendant 2, Natha Singh, Jang Singh and Kapuri were present among others. Ram Rakhi defendant 1 was also present. They did not then point out to the Revenue Officer that the land had already been sold by the proprietors of the village to defendant 2. In their presence the mutation was attested by the Revenue Officer in favour of the plaintiff as the reversionary heir (waris bazgasht) of Sobhi deceased.
(3.) The plaintiff sought redemption of the land on payment of the mortgage money from defendant 1 according to Section 4 of the Redemption of Mortgages (Punjab) Act, 1913 (Punjab Act 2 of 1913), but her application in this respect was dismissed by the Collector in default on October 23, 1962.;