Punjab-Haryana High Court
Karamjit Singh & Ors vs Balwinder Singh & Ors on 25 September, 2013
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
RSA No.1075 of 2013 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1075 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of decision: 25.09.2013
Karamjit Singh & ors. ......Appellant(s)
Versus
Balwinder Singh & ors. ......Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
* * *
Present: Mr. G.S. Kaura, Advocate for the appellants.
Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral)
CM No.2844-C of 2013 For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, delay of 29 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
RSA No.1075 of 2013 (O&M) The appellants filed the instant suit seeking declaration to the effect that the suit land was in the joint ownership and possession of the plaintiffs as well as the defendants after setting aside the Sanad Taqseem (instrument of partition), dated 24.8.2000 and mutation No. 15985 sanctioned on 1.4.2002, with a further right to the appellants to have separate possession and ownership of the parties corrected in the revenue record and partitioned the joint land afresh.
The suit was partly decreed by the trial Court in the following terms:
"On the basis of discussion made above and findings returned on issues above, the suit of Saini Pushpinder 2013.09.30 15:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh RSA No.1075 of 2013 (O&M) 2 the plaintiffs qua the relief of declaration as claimed by the plaintiffs fails and the same is, hereby, dismissed whereas the suit qua the relief of permanent injunction as claimed by the plaintiffs succeeds and the same is, hereby, decreed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants and decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, attornies etc. from making alienation of any specific portion or that of any specific khasra number in respect of the land in dispute and further restraining the defendants from raising any kind of construction on any specific portion in the suit land which may be detrimental to the rights of the other co- sharers, is, hereby, passed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the record room.
It may further be relevant to notice that while declining the relief of declaration, the Court has found that the said mode of partition was not accepted by the Revenue Authorities and the partition application of the appellants was dismissed by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade-cum- Tehsildar, Jagraon vide his order dated 30.3.2005. However, the aforesaid order was never challenged by the appellants in a court of competent jurisdiction by filing an appeal or otherwise.
Learned counsel for the appellants states that in fact the only Saini Pushpinder 2013.09.30 15:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh RSA No.1075 of 2013 (O&M) 3 remedy with the appellants was to challenge the aforesaid order before the competent court of jurisdiction on the revenue side.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, this appeal is dismissed being without any merit.
Needless to say that the appellants are at liberty to challenge the order of the Revenue Authorities, as mentioned, by seeking a proper remedy before the competent court of jurisdiction in accordance with law.
September 25, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
ps JUDGE
Saini Pushpinder
2013.09.30 15:00
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh