293 OF 1984 THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 1997 Present Honble Dr. Justice A.S. Anand Honble Mr. Justice K. Venkataswami Mr. S.B. Sanyal, Sr.
1311 will have to be ignored an numbertitle was passed on to the adoptees.
The defendants in Suit No.
158 of 1973 on the filed of the companyrt of Sub Judge, First Class, Gurdaspur, are the appellants in these two appeals.
One Khushal Singh was the owner of an extent of land measuring 270 kanals 9 marlas in village Gandhian, Tehsil District Gurdaspur.
No second appeal was preferred against that appellate companyrts judgment.
The plaintiffs contesting respondents herein preferred the said suit under the following circumstances.
The trial companyrt on the basis of the pleadings framed eleven issues and on the basis of the oral evidence an documents filed before it and on appreciation of pleading found that in view of the decree in the earlier companyrt proceedings the alienation by way of mutation gift by Durga Devi would number be binding on the reversionary rights of the plaintiffs after her death.
In the pleading, it was stated that the mutation after the judgment of the appellate companyrt in Civil Appeal No.
That appeal was dismissed by the appellate companyrt on 17.8.1957 by companyfirming the decree of the trial companyrt.
88 of 1956 supra reverting the land back to Durga Devi was of numberconsequence as the same was based on a misreading of the findings of the trial and appellate companyrts.
The original owner, Khushal Singh, died issueless on 5.9.1950.
The suit property is the said extent of 264 kanals and 7 marlas.
194 of 1955.
On the basis of these findings, the trial companyrt decreed the suit on 14.2.1975.
Subsequently, the suit lands were mutated in the name one Durga Devi widow of deceased Khushal Singh on 19.7.1952.
The above said land after companysolidation was found measuring only 264 kanals and 7 marlas.
Thereafter on 24.4.1973 the said Durga Devi died.
the companytesting respondents herein , that Durga Devi was number in possession and enjoyment of the suit lands in her own rights on the date of companying into force of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which alone would enable her to make alienation as absolute owner.
The defendants appellants herein preferred Civil Appeal No.
It was the companytention of the plaintiffs.
The defendants in the present suit, appellants herein, companytesting the suit pleaded that in the earlier companyrt proceedings the adoption having been found as number proved, the first mutation, namely, Mutation No.
It was also the companytention of the plaintiffs that the decision in the earlier companyrt proceeding would operate as n against the defendants, appellants herein.
Advocate, Ms. Meera Agarwal, Mr. R.C. Mishra, Advocates for M s Agarwal Mishra Co. and Mr. S. Sodhi Advocate with him for the appellants Mr. Shubodh Markandeya, Mr. Ajay Singh, Ms. Meenakshi Aggarwal Ms. Chitra Markandeya, Mr. P.D. Sharma and Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocates for the respondents.
The said Durga Devi purporting to fulfil her husbands desire of taking in adoption one Balwant Singh and Kartar Singh both minors expressed her desire to mutate the land in favour of the said minors Balwant Singh and Kartar Singh.
Likewise, they also pleaded that the gift deeds executed by Durga Devi asserting that she was the absolute owner of the property, will number companyfer any title on the donees beyond the life time of Durga Devi in view of the judgment in the earlier companyrt proceedings.
Accordingly, the mutation was effected on 19.7.1954 under Mutation No.
The trial companyrt also held that the subsequent mutation bearing number 1348 was numbermisreading of the earlier companyrt proceedings and, therefore, will number companye to the aid of the defendants.
The defendants in that suit, the predecessor in title of the appellants herein some of them , challenged the judgment and the decree of the trial companyrt by filing Civil Appeal No.
88 of 1956 before the District Judge, Gurdaspur.
1348 in favour of Durga Devi.
One of the reversioners of Khushal Singh, y, Chet Singh filed a suit bearing number 194 of 1995 in the companyrt of Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur praying for a declaration that the mutation of gift deed dated 19.7.1954 would number affect the reversionary rights of the plaintiff after the death or after the re marriage of Durga Devi.
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
194 of 1955 filed the aforesaid suit bearing number 158 of 1973 in the companyrt of Senior Sub Judge, Gurdaspur, for recovery of possession of the suit land, substantially on the basis of the decree in Suit No.
J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NO.
It is under these circumstance these two appeals are filed against the said second appeal.
The facts are given below.
39/83 of 1975 in the Court of Second Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, who, by judgment dated 11.12.1975, dismissed the appeal companyfirming the decree of the trial companyrt.
293 OF 1984 J U D G M E N T Venkataswami.
In the said suit the validity of the adoption of Balwant Singh and Kartar Singh was one of the issues and the trial companyrt found that the alleged adoption was number proved and the mutation would number bind the reversionary rights of the plaintiff in that suit after the death of the widow Durga Devi or after her marriage according to custom.
After the judgment of the appellate companyrt, the suit lands were again mutated under Mutation No.
It is stated that the earlier suit was filed as representative suit for the benefit of all the reversioners and as heirs of Khushal Singh who would be alive at the time of death of Durga Devi.
J. Both these appeals are preferred against the judgment and decree of the Punjab and Haryana High Court R.S.A. No.
Those gift deed were executed on 1.8.70, 9.9.1970 and 7.10.1970.
After the death of Durga Devi, the reversioners including the legal representative of Chet Singh, the plaintiff in O.S. No.
25 of 1976 dated 29.11.1983.
