Back
2015 Supreme(P&H) 1135
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh
RSA No.1579 of 2011 (O&M)
Surjit Kaur
v.
Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee
{Decided on 28/08/2015}
For the Appellant(s) in RSA No.1579 of 2011 &
COCP No.1806 of 2014 & for the respondent(s)
in RSA No.4331 of 2014:Mr. Mohit Jaggi, Advocate.
For the Appellant(s) in RSA No.4331 of 2014 &
for the respondent(s) in RSA No.1579 of 2011 &
COCP No.1806 of 2014:Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate.
Headnote:Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.34--Suit for Declaration--Plaintiff claimed to be owner of property by way of sale deed in her favour against Gurdwara Sahib--Suit dismissed as --
(i) The suit has been filed against the Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee which is not a juristic person--Gurdwara Sahib has not been impleaded as a party to the suit;
(ii) The filing of suit in the year 1997 in respect of entries of 1960 is held to be barred by limitation;
(iii) Plaintiff cannot prove her ownership/title on the basis of alleged sale deed as the same was not found to be based on passing of consideration;
(iv) Transfer which was not strictly in terms of any gift or otherwise but the same was given effect in the revenue record after consolidation and the same existed in the revenue record, continuously coupled with the construction on where half of the property was constructed despite protest by the plaintiff, it has come on record that property in question is being used for religious (Langar) purposes; and
(iv) Even if gift in favour of Gurdwara is not forthcoming that itself is to sufficient to absolve the plaintiff from proving her title to the land in order to maintain the suit. (Paras 32 to 35)
Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J.: -- By this judgment the above mentioned three cases are being disposed of. Facts are being taken from RSA No.1579 of 2011.
2. Plaintiff Surjit Kaur is in appeal against judgment and decree dated 16.03.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, whereby judgment and decree dated 17.11.2005 passed by Additional Civil Judge Senior Division, Dasuya has been reversed. Plaintiff filed suit for possession of land measuring 1 kanal 17 marlas comprised in Khewat No.109, Khatauni No.136, Khasra No.339 (1-17) situated in village Gambowal Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur. Further the plaintiff has prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from changing the nature of the suit property.
3. Plaintiff has pleaded that she is the owner of suit land. She appointed her husband Harbans Singh as power of attorney to file the present suit. Defendant-respondent has no concern with the land in question. Defendant-respondent by taking benefit of absence of the plaintiff, got made illegal entries in the revenue record and forcibly occupied the suit land in November 1996. Gurdwara Sahib of the village Gambowal is constructed in Khasra No.308 which is situated opposite to the suit land after crossing a passage. The suit land is lying vacant. Respondent occupied the suit land illegally and has refused to vacate it. Hence, the suit.
4. The defendant-respondent contested the suit pleading that suit itself is not maintainable against Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee. Besides, taking other pleas, it has been urged that the suit is not maintainable in the present form. On merits the defendant denied the allegations of the plaintiff and stated that Smt. Piar Kaur was the original owner of the suit land. She donated the suit land for religious purposes in the year 1960. The plaintiff has no right in the suit land as vendor of the appellant was not the owner of the suit land at the time of alienation made on behalf of Smt. Piar Kaur. Smt. Piar Kaur ceased to be owner of the land when she donated the same in favour of respondent. The sale in favour of plaintiff/appellant is claimed to be bogus, null and void and without consideration. Smt. Piar Kaur donated the land along with land in Khasra No.308 to Gurdwara Sahib in the year 1960 as ‘Dharam Arth’ and during the consolidation in the village the suit land was allotted in the name of Gurdwara Sahib. Khatauni Pamaish was prepared according to which Khasra No.308 along with land in question have been shown as ‘Bila Lagan Bawja’ ‘Dharam Arth’. Suit land is being used for Langar Sahib and other religious functions of Gurdwara Sahib since the year 1961. Sri Guru Granth Sahib of Gurdwara Sahib is recorded to be in possession of the suit land adversely to the vendor of the plaintiff since the year 1960-61. Defendant further alleged that keeping in view the possession of the defendant, defendant has perfected its title by way of adverse possession also. After filing of replication, following issues were framed:-
“1. Whether the plaintiff is owner of the suit land? OPP.
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of possession of the suit land and permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP
3. Whether the plaintiff has got no locus standi to file this suit? OPP
4. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable? OPD 5. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is time barred? OPD
6. Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties? OPD
7. Relief”.
5. Issues No.1 and 2 are of paramount consideration in the helm of affairs. Onus to prove both these issues was on the plaintiff. The suit of the plaintiff is based on title, on the plea that in her absence, defendant has occupied the suit land forcibly in the year 1996, whereas plea of defendant is that earlier owner of suit land Smt. Piar Kaur donated the same along with Khasra No.308 in favour of Gurdwara Sahib as ‘Dharam Arth’ in the year 1960 during consolidation proceedings. Since the property is being use
