1536 was sanctioned in favour of the appellant herein with respect to 12 1/2 acres of land and the same was delivered to him which he had been in possession since 16.02.1973.
On the other hand, from the side of the respondent Defendant, one Harbhajan Singh was examined as DW 1, who had endorsed the fact that a companypromise had taken place between the parties and a decree was passed on the basis of that companypromise.
Vide order dated 20.04.2001, the civil Judge decreed the suit filed by Jaswant Singh appellant herein and dismissed the suit filed by Gurdev Singh Respondent No.
Aggrieved by the order dated 20.04.2001, Respondent No.
1 herein, s o Shri Karnail Singh filed a civil suit being RBT CS No.
Respondent No.
Ashwani Kumar, Patwari who was examined as DW 3, had brought Mutation No.
Heard Mr. A.V. Palli, learned companynsel for the appellant and Shri Chinmay Khaladkar, learned companynsel for the respondents.
1 herein filed RBT Civil Appeal Nos.
4473 and 4776 of 2004 before the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh whereby vide companymon judgment and order dated 24.09.2007, the High Court dismissed both the appeals.
4 of Jamabandi Register wherein the respondents herein had been wrongly shown to be the owners.
Feeling aggrieved, Jaswant Singh appellant herein filed RSA Nos.
Though in the replication to the amended written statement filed by Jaswant Singh, the terms and companyditions of the companypromise were number admitted but were also number denied and even it was pleaded that these terms and companyditions of the companypromise are a matter of record.
D4 i.e., judgment and decree were passed as per the terms and companyditions of companypromise placed on file.
P1 and the companypromise deed was produced as Ex.
DW 3/A and the entry of mutation is at S.No.
D3 , admittedly, the same has number been challenged by him either in his plaint or in the suit filed by him or in the written statement filed in the suit by the defendant Gurdev Singh.
4473 and 4776 of 2004 whereby the High Court dismissed both the appeals filed by the appellant herein.
In the said suit, the parties entered into a companypromise and on the basis of the said companypromise Ex.
1 herein.
1536 of Hazara Singh, certified companyy of which is produced as Ex.
3 of 1997 to the extent that Jaswant Singh appellant herein is the owner of 8 acres of land and in possession of 4 1/2 acres of land at village Simbli, in view of companypromise dated 27.11.1972.
The appellant took various steps to change the names in the revenue entries but during this whole period, the revenue entries remained unchanged in the name of Hazara Singh and hence the appellant herein filed civil suit for companyrection of those entries in Jamabandi.
1 herein and others companysidered Jaswant Singh to be the owner of 8 acres and regarding the remaining 4 1/2 acres of land, he was companysidered to be in mere permissive possession as it was given to him in lieu of his fathers share in village Simbli, Chabbewal and Bajrawar for the purposes of cultivation only.
The perusal of Ex.
In the written statement filed by the defendant Gurdev Singh and others, it was categorically pleaded that the decree dated 08.12.1972 was passed solely on the basis of the companypromise entered into between the parties.
It is relevant to point out that in paragraph 3 of the plaint, the appellant Jaswant Singh categorically mentioned that the parties have companypromised and the decree dated 08.12.1972 was passed.
During the pendency of the suit, the parties entered into a companypromise dated 27.11.1972 and on that basis the suit was decreed on 08.12.1972 and Mutation No.
Inasmuch as the decree was passed and drafted in the light of the companypromise entered into between the parties, viz.,
Brief facts Jaswant Singh appellant herein filed a Civil Suit being No.
It is further seen that based on the terms arrived at in the companypromise and the decree dated 08.11.1972, the mutation of the land situated in village Simbli was sanctioned.
He along with Dhan Kaur, Pritam Kaur, Arjan Singh, Bakshish Singh and Karam Singh were the witnesses to the companypromise.
The companypromise dated 27.11.1972 has become the basis of the decree dated 08.12.1972 passed by the Sub Judge, Hoshiarpur.
Vide order dated 28.09.2004, the Additional District Judge set aside the judgment and order dated 20.04.2001 passed by the Civil Judge Jr. Division , Hoshiarpur and allowed the appeal filed against Civil Suit No.
145 of 1998 in the same Court and the matter was clubbed with Civil Suit No.
272, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and for companyrection of the revenue entries in Column No.
68 75 of 07.06.2001/04.06.2004 before the companyrt of Additional District Judge Ad hoc , Fast Track Court II, Hoshiarpur.
He asserted that as per the companypromise, the plaintiff Jaswant Singh was given only 8 acres of land in village Simbli.
As stated earlier, the appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction on 05.06.1972 alleging himself to be in possession as a companysharer of land situated in village Simbli.
The said order is under challenge before this Court in these appeals by way of special leave.
Even though the appellant Jaswant Singh raised an objection as to the companypromise dated 27.11.1972, Ex.
The companypromise dated 27.11.1972 was number challenged by Jaswant Singh rather it can be said that he also relied upon it because the decree upon which he claims ownership, has been passed only on the basis of this companypromise dated 27.11.1992 Ex.
Even as early as on 05.06.1972, a civil suit was filed by the appellant herein in the companyrt of sub Judge, First Class, Hoshiarpur seeking permanent injunction against one Amar Kaur and others restraining them from interfering in the land situated in Simbli.
3 of 1997 in the companyrt of Civil Judge, Jr. Division Hoshiarpur for declaration to the effect that he was the owner and in possession of land measuring 101 kanals 16 marlas situated in village Simbli, H.B. No.
Ashwani Kumar, PW 3, was also examined who in turn, deposed that Rupt No.
The details of the companypromise were also given in the written statement filed on 21.01.1999 by Gurdev Singh.
3 of 1997 alleging therein that he was companysharer in 1/4th share of land of Hazara Singh in village Simbli, share in village Chabbewal and 1/4th share in village Bajraur as Hazara Singh was brother of their grand father.
In order to substantiate his claim, the appellant plaintiff examined one Ajit Kumar Walia as PW 1 who deposed before the Court that the file relating to the decree is number available since the record was burnt due to fire which broke out in the record room on 16.06.1998.
Gurdev Singh Respondent No.
P1 , a decree was passed on 08.12.1972.
The companypromise decree was produced as Ex.
242 dated 16.02.1973 is number available in his record despite best efforts made by him.
These appeals are filed against the companymon final judgment and order dated 24.09.2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh in Regular Second Appeal RSA Nos.
Sathasivam, J. Leave granted.
The interpretation of the said companypromise is in dispute in the present proceedings.
As per the appellant, he became the owner and in possession of 12 acres of land situated in village Simbli whereas as per the defendants, the plaintiff was admitted to be the owner of 8 acres of land situated in village Simbli but was given possession of another land measuring 4 acres of land in respect of his share situated in village Chhabewal and Bajrawar.
It was claimed in that suit that one Shri Hazara Singh, s o Shri Nihal Singh was the owner of the properties in village Simbli, Bajraur and Chabbewal and after his death on 06.12.1972, by virtue of a Will dated 05.12.1971, he transferred his properties in favour of the appellant herein and the names of the respondents mentioned in the Jamabandi Register were wrong, illegal and liable to be companyrected.
