Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):

The present Regular Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. dated 29.07.2024, in Civil Appeal No. 09 of 2024, whereby the appeal as preferred by the State/appellants has been dismissed and the judgment and decree, as passed by the learned Civil Judge(Sr. Division) Sarkaghat District Mandi, H.P. dated 30.11.2023 have been affirmed.

Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs respondents filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of injunction under the provisions of 34,38 & 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

It was averred in the plaint that the land comprised in Khewat No. 50 Min, Khatauni No. 65, bearing Khasra No. 1103 & 1532, Kitta 2, land measuring 00-04-22 situated at Mohal Nawahi, Hadbast No.368, Illaqua Suranga, Tehsil Sarkaghat, Distt. Mandi (HP) is suit land and copy of jamabandi for the year 2010-11 has been annexed with the suit. It was further averred in the plaint that the suit land before the settlement operation which took place in the area concerned in the year 1968-69 was comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 15min/35 bearing Khasra No.803/4 min (old) corresponding to Khasra No.1081(new) after settlement land measuring 0-01-48 hectare and Khasra No.872 min (old) corresponding to Khasra No.1560 (new) land measuring 00-02-74 hectare, kitta 2 measuring 00-04-22 hectares and thereafter in consolidation operation, which was effected in the year of 1990-1991. The suit land carved in Khata Khatauni No. 41 min/59 bearing Khasra No. 1081 (old) corresponding to Khasra No. 1103 (new) and khasra No. 1560 (old) and corresponding to Khasra No. 1532 (new) in total land measuring 00-04-22 hectare, Nakal Missal Hakiyat Bandobast Jadid, Mouza Nabahi/ 368 and Nakal Missal Hakiyat consolidation of the year 1993-1994 of Mouza Nabahi Tehsil Sarkaghat Ditsrict Mandi (H) are annexed with the suit land. It was further averred that the suit land is jointly owned and possessed by the plaintiffs along with proforma defendants and recorded in the possession of department of HPPWD in the revenue records as gair mumkin tank and gair mumkin sadak. It was further averred that the department of HPPWD and Government of Himachal Pradesh constructed a PWD road namely Ghumarwin to Sarkaghat between the year 1955-1960 and water tank (Houz) through suit land and the HPPWD road and water tank (Houz) get through the suit land owned by the plaintiffs.

As per plaintiff, at the time of the construction of the road, assurances were given by the then officials of State that adequate compensation shall be paid to the plaintiffs and under such assurances the construction of the road was allowed. It was further assured that at appropriate time acquisition proceedings shall be initiated by the department and the adequate compensation shall be paid to the claimants/plaintiffs. In the revenue record gair mumkin sadak and water tank has been incorporated. Since no compensation with respect to construction of the road has been paid to the plaintiffs, therefore, the suit was filed for declaration and injunction against the defendants. It was prayed that the plaintiffs and proforma defendants are legally entitled to get their rights of compensation of the suit land and the defendants have got right, title and interest over the same.

The suit was contested by the defendants by raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, cause of action, mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties, etc. On merits, the contents of the revenue record were admitted. It was admitted that Public Works Department has constructed the road namely “Ghumarwin-Sarkaghat”in the year 1955-1960. The stand was adopted that the road was constructed with the implied and expression consent of the general public including the plaintiffs. It was further averred that the Public Works Department had acquired the land of the land holders as per the p