IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
H. S. Madaan, J.
Kamlesh - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and others - Respondents - Respondent
C.R. No. 3779 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 09-01-2023
Fraud - Land Dispute - [Transfer of Property Act, Section 54] - [Indian Contract Act, Section 17] - [Specific Relief Act, Section 38, 39] - The court discussed the fraudulent reduction of land possession and the rights of co-sharers in joint land, considering the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, Indian Contract Act, and Specific Relief Act. The court found that the plaintiff could not restrain co-sharers from alienating their share in the joint land, leading to the dismissal of the revision petition.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff claimed ownership and possession of a specific portion of land, alleging fraudulent reduction of land possession by the defendants. The trial court granted ad interim injunction, which was partly modified by the Additional District Judge, allowing co-sharers to alienate their share in the joint land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the plaintiff's application for relief of protecting possession over her share of land could not be allowed, as the co-sharers had the right to alienate their share in the joint land.
Issues: Fraudulent reduction of land possession, rights of co-sharers in joint land, application for relief of protecting possession over the plaintiff's share of land.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the plaintiff could not restrain co-sharers from making alienation from the joint land to the extent of their share, as granted by the Additional District Judge.
Final Decision: The revision petition was found to be without merit and was dismissed accordingly. Petition dismissed.
H. S. MADAAN, J.
1. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that, plaintiff – Kamlesh wife of Ramesh Chand had filed a suit against defendants State of Haryana and others, contending that she is owner in possession of land measuring 77 Kanal 16 Marla being 151/14352 share of total land measuring 7396 Kanal 19 Marla, situated at village Padha, Tehsil Ballah, District Karnal, having purchased the same from earlier owners Smt. Yashvanti w/o Krishan Kumar and Smt. Saroj w/o Satbir and she was delivered exclusive possession of the land measuring 72 Kanal 7 Marla by her vendors out of total land of 77 Kanal 16 Marla purchased by her and possession of rest of the land was delivered in the form of share. As a matter of fact vendors of the plaintiff had purchased the land from Kanwar Bhan @ Kanwal Pal, Suresh Kumar and Dharampal son of Hari Ram, vide registered sale deed No. 94/1 dated 9.5.2006 and mutation was entered and sanctioned in their favour. Kanwar Bhan @ Kanwar Pal, Suresh Kumar and Dharampal were in exclusive possession of land measuring 74 Kanal 7 Marla and in rest of the land they were cosharers and they had delivered the possession of the land to the plaintiff as per their possession in the Revenue record, however, the defendants in collusion with each other reduced the land in possession of vendors of the plaintiff from 74 Kanal 7 Marlas to 72 Kanal 7 Marlas in the jamabandi for the year 2014-2015. The vendors of the plaintiff also came in possession of the land of those numbers; that when the possession of the same land was delivered to the plaintiff by her vendors, the defendants again in collusion with each other reduced the land measuring 72 Kanal 7 Marla to 68 Kanal 8 Marla without order of any competent court or authority and have rather divided the land in different Khewats. When the plaintiff obtained a copy of the jamabandi for the year 2019-2020, she came to know about the fraud played by the defendants.
2. The defendants on getting notice, put in appearance and filed reply to the suit as well as injunction application, submitting that in Khewat No. 697 one Dharambir son of Zile Singh @ Zila had transferred his share in favour of his wife and sons in specific killa numbers vide Transfer deed No. 159/1 dated 9.6.2020 and on basis of that transfer, deed mutation No. 4491 dated 15.6.2020 was entered and sanctioned and Khewat was bifurcated as one co-sharer had transferred his land. The plaintiff had purchased land measuring 77 Kanal 15 Marla out of total land measuring 7396 Kanal 19 Marlas from the previous owners. The total land measuring 7396 Kanal 19 Marla is joint land comprising of 'Chahi' and Gair Mumkin land. The defendants denied that they have divided the suit land in two parts and caused wrongful loss to the plaintiff and wrongful gain to the other owners.
3. After hearing the arguments, the trial Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Assandh, vide order dated 1.3.2021 accepted the application for grant of ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from executing any sale deed of land comprised in Khewat No. 741 min.
4. The plaintiff had filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC qua defendants No. 4 to 6, who had been impleaded later on, on an application having been filed by them. That application was disposed of vide order dated 12.11.2021, observing that no relief had been claimed against defendants No. 4 to 6. Vide that order it was further observed that order dated 1.3.2021 passed by the Court was still subsisting as there was no change in circumstances qua defendants No. 1 to 3.
5. Defendants No. 4 to 6 had filed an appeal before District Judge, Karnal, which was assigned to Additional District Judge, Karnal, who vide order dated 1.12.2021, allowed the same partly, in as much as, portion of the impugned order dated 1.3.2021 and 12.11.2021, which had the effect of restraining defendants No. 4 to 6 from alienating their share in the Khewat and executing and getting registered sale deeds
Co-sharers have the right to alienate their share in joint land, and the plaintiff cannot restrain them from doing so.
Temporary injunction—In order to succeed in application for grant of temporary injunction, plaintiffs are required to show not only existence of a prima facie and arguable case in their favour, but t....
Co-sharers can construct on their respective shares of joint land without infringing on others' rights; exclusive possession does not confer separate ownership until legally partitioned.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.