Dismissed

Ami Chand Since Deceased Th His Lrs Mam Raj and Ors. v. Punna and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Dec 2018RSA/3338/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this second appeal regarding a suit for declaration of land status and permanent injunction, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant failed to rebut the presumption of possession attached to the jamabandi record, thus failing to invoke Section 45 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act.

What did the court decide?

Second appeal dismissed; no interference with lower courts' judgments allowing defendants' title/possession status.

Ami Chand Since Deceased Th His Lrs Mam Raj and… — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

RSA No.3338 of 2016 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RSA No.3338 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision.20.12.2018

¶5

Ami Chand (since deceased) through LRs ....Appellants

¶6

¶7

Punna and others ...Respondents

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶9

Present: Mr. K.S. Banyana, Advocate for the appellants.

¶10

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)

¶11

The appellant-plaintiff has not been successful in claiming declaration with consequential relief of permanent and mandatory injunction for correction of the entries in the revenue record reflected in the name of defendant No.1 and 2 as banjar kadeem in respect of khewat/khatauni No.307//287/667, Khasra No.63 (28-0) situated in village Bhoj Rajpura, Tehsil Morni, District Panchkula. It was alleged that the entries were incorrect as in collusion with the revenue officials, defendants No.1 and 2 were shown as tenants whereas status of the plaintiff was of a tenant.

¶12

Defendants opposed the suit and stated that land was uncultivable and denied possession of the plaintiff. Defendant No.3, Tehsildar/Collector 2^nd Grade also contested the suit by raising objection qua jurisdiction of the Civil Court.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that Courts below committed illegality and perversity in dismissing the suit, as Section 45 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act empowers the Civil Court to make declaration qua correction of alleged

¶14

PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.01.03 12:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

-2-

¶16

RSA No.3338 of 2016 (O&M)

¶17

infringement of right of the plaintiff, in view of the incorrect entry.

¶18

I am afraid aforementioned argument is not sustainable, as the plaintiff failed to lead any evidence to rebut the presumption attached with the jamabandi for the year 2006-07 whereby defendants No.2 and 3 were shown to be in possession of the suit land. In the absence of the same, right as provided in Section 45 of the Land Revenue Act could not be invoked.

¶19

In this view of the matter, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the judgments and decrees rendered by the Courts below, much less, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court. No ground for interference is made out. Resultantly, the second appeal is dismissed.

¶20

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE December 20, 2018 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No

¶21

PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.01.03 12:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ami Chand Since Deceased Th His Lrs Mam Raj and Ors. v. Punna and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ami Chand Since Deceased Th His Lrs Mam Raj and Ors. v. Punna and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurnam Singh & Ors. Vs Jangir Kaur & Ors.

Prem Lata Vs Dara Singh and Others

Gurdial Dass Now Deceased Th Its Legal Heir Atul Garg Vs N.K. Garg and Others

Balbir Singh and Anr. Vs Lakhbir Singh and Anr.

Rameshwar & Anr. Vs Beer Singh & Ors.

Bharpur Singh Vs Ishwar Singh (Now Deceased) Thru Lrs. Krishana and Ors.