IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on:17.11.2025 Pronounced on:19.11.2025 Uploaded on:21.11.2025 Yakub and others ...Appellants Versus Suleman and others ... Respondents(cid:1)

2. COCP-877-2001(O&M)

Samshu ...Petitioner Versus (cid:1)

Yakub and others ... Respondents(cid:1)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. J. S. Bhatia, Advocate for the appellants in RSA-3177-1996 for respondents in COCP-877-2001.

Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate(cid:1)

for respondents No.1 and 2 in RSA-3177-1996 (cid:1)

for the petitioner in COCP-877-2001.(cid:1)

****

(cid:1)

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.

1. The instant appeal bearing RSA No.3177 of 1996 and COCP No.877 of 2001 are being decided by a common order, as they involve common question of law and facts. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from RSA No.3177 of 1996 and the parties are referred to in terms of their status before the learned trial Court.

2. Defendants No.1 to 5 are the appellants before this Court challenging the judgment and decree dated 08.10.1992 passed by the learned trial Court decreeing the suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2-plaintiffs and the judgment dated 24.09.1996 passed by the learned 1^st Appellate Court vide which the appeal preferred by them against the aforesaid judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court, has been dismissed.

3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that defendants No.1 to 5 are recorded as owners of agricultural land comprised in Khewat No.530, Khatauni No.788, Rect. No. 92, Killa No.6 (8-0), Khatauni No.789, Rect. No.92, Killa No.4(8-0) and 5(8-0), total measuring 24 kanals, situated in Village Kot, Tehsil Hathin, District Faridabad, as per jamabandi for the year 1979-80. The suit land was mortgaged in the year 1902 by the predecessors-in-interest of defendants No.1 to 5 in favour of the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiffs and proforma defendants No.6 to 27, who have since remained in actual cultivating possession as mortgagees, while defendants No.1 to 5 have remained out of possession and never redeemed the mortgaged land. The plaintiffs claimed that the mortgage has continued for over 83 years, thus, the period of redemption has expired and the right, title and interest of defendants No. 1 to 5 stand extinguished. As a consequence thereto, mortgagee rights of the plaintiffs and proforma defendants have matured into ownership. Though the jamabandi for the year 1979-80 contained entries in respect of Khasra Nos.92/4 (8-0) and 92/5 (8-0) showing the land as redeemed and the mortgagors as gair marusi, the plaintiffs asserted such entries to be incorrect, as no redemption had taken place nor was there any corresponding rapat, mutation or girdawari entry, and as such, said revenue entries, which were made without their knowledge, are void in law. In the alternative, the plaintiffs pleaded that by virtue of their uninterrupted, peaceful and continuous possession for more than 60 years without any interference from defendants No.1 to 5, they have also become owners by way of adverse possession. It was further alleged that the Government has proposed to dig a nala for discharge of flood water from the area of Bahin and Kot, for which approximately nine karms of the suit land have been acquired and compensation is likely to be disbursed, and defendants No.1 to 5, relying on the incorrect entries, have threatened to receive the said compensation despite having no right or title. Repeated requests by the plaintiffs and proforma defendants to acknowledge their claim were refused, leading to the filing of the present suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

4. Upon issuance of summons, appellant-defendants No.1 to 5 appeared through their counsel and filed written statement wherein they raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability of suit, concealment of facts, cause of action, locus standi of respondents No.1 and 2-plaint