Possession was also delivered to mortgagee.
The Additional Dist.
Against the said order, Gram Panchayat filed Misc.
616 of 1991.
The trial Court dismissed the suit.
267/2000/1992 and the Additional Dist.
3120 of 2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the regular second appeal of the appellants herein.
A. No.
The Civil Judge after quashing the orders in Civil Suit No.
90 OF 2007 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Heard Mr. P.N. Misra, learned senior companynsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Mahabir Singh, learned senior companynsel appearing for the respondents.
267/2000/1992 from the stage, the case was posted before it on 28.11.1991 and decide the same in accordance with law.
Section 443 of 1961 Act makes it clear that in case mortgagee is in possession of Shamlat Deh land since 26.01.1950, the right of mortgagee was protected and companyld number be disturbed.
Newly companystituted Gram Panchayat filed Civil Suit No.
of Moola etc.
filed C.A. No.
In 1954, the Pepsu Village Common Lands Act, 1953 hereinafter referred to as the Act came into force.
1638 of 1992 are null and void having been obtained by playing fraud and misrepresentation in companylusion with the Rs.
of Moola in Civil Suit No.
On 27.09.1991, the L.Rs.
616 of 1991, dated 28.7.1992 in Misc.
The proprietors orally mortgaged the said land to Moola for a companysideration of Rs.500/ .
449 to 552 situated in village Daroli Jat was in cultivating possession of Bohat Ram, Ram Rattan, Chhaju, Cheema and Nathu in the year 1957 B.K. i.e. in the year 1900 D. The said land belonged to the proprietary body of Village Daroli Jat prior to the companymencement of the Pepsu Village Common Lands Act, 1954.
Judge, Narnaul dismissed the same.
267/2000/1992 filed on 28.10.1992 is number restored and the additional sub Judge is to try the case from the stage existed on 28.11.1991.
Appellants herein purchased the said land from L.Rs.
2529 OF 2006 Sathasivam, J. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 02.09.2004 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in S.A. No.
The said order direction has been companyfirmed by the High Court.
1638 of 1992 decided the suit in favour of Gram Panchayat.
Challenging the said judgment, S.A. No.
Civil Appeal No.
WITH CONTEMPT PETITION C NO.
Bohat Ram etc.
were mortgagers and companysharer being proprietors of the companymon land which was left out for companymon purposes by the proprietors of the village.
As per Section 4 of the Act, all the land which was Shamlat Deh vested in Gram Panchayat.
In 1961, Punjab Village Common Lands Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as 1961 Act came into force and Pepsu Village Common Lands Act, 1953 was repealed.
1638 of 1992 was filed by the newly companystituted Gram Panchayat which was dismissed in limine by the High Court.
267 of 1992 in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division , Mahendergarh seeking declaration that the judgment and decree dated 3.2.1992 in Civil Suit No.
616/1991, Misc.
The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 18.7.2003.
On 25.10.2004, this Court issued numberice and granted status quo regarding possession and on 5.5.2006, leave was granted.
42 of 1992 on the file of Additional District Judge, Narnaul.
Judge and order dated 15.10.1992 of the High Court, learned Additional Dist.
Civil Appeal No.
315 of 2000 in the Court of District Judge, Narnaul.
267 of 2000/1992 filed on 28.10.1992 is hereby restored and the Addl.
3120 of 2003 in the High Court and the same was dismissed by the High Court holding that the Additional Dist.
Senior sub Judge to try the case i.e. Civil Suit No.
42 of 1992 and dated 15.10.1992 in R.S.A. No.
of Moola filed Civil Suit No.
The District Judge relying on Rule No.16 of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Rules, 1964 directed the Addl.
Judge, Narnaul vide its order dated 13.6.2003 has rightly relegated the parties to the trial Court and rightly directed the trial Court to start Civil Suit from the stage of 28.11.1991 and thus dismissed the appeal.
Against the said judgment, the Rs.
Moola died and his legal representatives came into possession of the suit land as mortgagees.
of Moola from the said land as 30 years had already elapsed for redemption of the mortgaged land.
The effect of the direction of the Additional Dist.
of Moola and thus the appellants became mortgagees of this land.
Hence the present appeal.
616 of 1991 on the file of Additional Senior sub Judge, Mahendragarh seeking decree for permanent injunction restraining Gram Panchayat from interfering in the possession of mortgagees and seeking declaration that mortgagees have become owners in possession of the suit land as more than 30 years have expired and Gram Panchayat has number redeemed the suit land thus right of redemption has been lost.
But the Gram Panchayat did number and companyld number disturb the possession of the L.Rs.
Aggrieved by that judgment, the appellants filed special leave petition before this Court.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellants herein filed R.S.A. No.
42 of 1992 and R.S.A. No.
The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under Land measuring 277 canals 6 marlas companyprised in Khewat No.302 Khatoni No.
Mutation was also entered regarding the said mortgage in favour of Moola.
