RSA/667/2005 of JAGTAMBA DEVI Vs BIDHI CHAND on 29 December 2005

The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.M.Jain, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?[1]

For the Appellant: Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for Respondents No.1 and 2.

V. M. Jain, J.(Oral)

This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial court and the appeal filed by her was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala.

Smt. Jagtamba Devi plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, alleging therein that she was the owner in possession of the suit property and that the father of defendants No.1 and 2 and husband of defendant No.3, in connivance with the revenue staff during settlement, got his name entered in the revenue record as non occupancy tenant in respect of Khasra No.724/1, measuring 15 Marlas, which was now never paid rent to the plaintiff during their life time. It was alleged that present defendants, who are the legal heirs of Gian Chand, have started interfering in the suit land on the basis of the entries in the revenue record showing them as the owners of the suit land by virtue of the provisions of Section 104 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1974. It was alleged that the wrong entries in favour of the defendants came to the knowledge of the plaintiff only in the year 1994 whereupon he had taken up the matter with the Settlement Officer for correction of entries, but the same was declined on the ground that Gian Chand, predecessor-in-interest of the defendants, had become the owner.

The suit was contested by the defendants by filing the written statement, alleging therein that the defendants had become owners of the suit property comprising in khasra Nos.913 and 914 and that the plaintiff had never challenged the order of the competent authority in this regard. It was further alleged that the plaintiff had no concern with the suit land. It was further alleged that Gian Chand, predecessor-in-interest of the defendants, being the tenant over the suit land was rightly conferred the proprietary rights and on the death of Gian Chand the defendants had inherited the suit property from Gian Chand.

the plaintiff filed the present regular second appeal in this court.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, in my opinion, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed. Both the courts below found it as a fact that Gian Chand was recorded as tenant over the suit land and on coming into force of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1974 he was conferred proprietary rights in respect of the suit land and mutation No.887 was sanctioned in his favour in this regard, whereby proprietary rights were conferred upon him. It was also found by the courts below that this mutation was sanctioned in the presence of the plaintiff and that for about 22 years the plaintiff kept mum and did not take action in this regard. It has also been found by the Courts below that the defendants, being the legal heirs of Gian Chand were the owners of the suit property and the plaintiff had no concern with the same. In my opinion, these findings recorded by the courts below are finding of fact based on evidence and do not call for any interference from this Court in the present regular second appeal, especially when nothing has been pointed out before me to show that there was any misreading of evidence or that any material piece of evidence was ignored by the Courts below while coming to these findings.

when no question of law much less a substantial question of law arises for determination in this appeal. Accordingly finding no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.

CMP Nos.1156 of 2005

In view of dismissal of the main appeal, this application has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

Issues

December 29,2005(g)

( V.M.Jain ),J.