IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (102 Date of Decision:-30.01.2026 Swaran Singh and Others … Appellants Versus Sardul Singh and Others ... Respondents ****

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Vikas Singh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Anamika Sheoran, Advocate for the appellants.

Ms. Rupinder K. Thind, Advocate with Mr. Balsher Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

****

VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral)

1. The present Regular Second Appeal (hereinafter referred to as “RSA”) has been instituted by the appellants–plaintiffs to challenge the judgment and decree dated 01.02.1995 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar, whereby the findings of the Trial Court were affirmed in their entirety. The Trial Court, by its judgment and decree dated 16.03.1992, passed by the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Tarn Taran, had decreed the suit instituted by the appellants–plaintiffs seeking a declaratory relief.

1.1. The appellants now impugn the concurrent findings of both courts below, contending that the same are legally untenable and factually erroneous, and seek appropriate redress through the appellate jurisdiction of this Court.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present litigation, as set out in the civil suit instituted by the plaintiffs-appellants, are as follows:-

“Assa Singh and Mangal Singh were the original owners of the agricultural land situated in village Dhotian. It was pleaded that the said owners had mortgaged the land with possession in favour of Ran Singh son of Wasawa Singh for a period of seven years, for an ostensible consideration of Rs. 2,500/-, by way of a registered mortgage deed dated

09.04.1947.

It was further averred that, upon consolidation of holdings, the land presently in dispute was allotted in lieu of the land earlier mortgaged by Assa Singh and Mangal Singh in favour of Ran Singh. The plaintiffs-appellants claimed to be the legal heirs and successors-in- interest of the original mortgagors, who had since passed away. It was specifically pleaded that the mortgage period stipulated in the deed had long expired and, consequently, the plaintiffs-appellants had become entitled to redeem the mortgaged land upon payment of the mortgage money of Rs. 2,500/- to the defendants, who were stated to be the legal heirs and successors-in-interest of the original mortgagee.

The plaintiffs-appellants further pleaded that Sardul Singh and Shangara Singh, defendants No. 1 and 2, along with Ishar Kaur, Joga Singh and Niranjan Singh (since deceased), claiming themselves to be the legal heirs of Ran Singh, had earlier instituted a suit against Assa Singh and Mangal Singh seeking a declaration of ownership over the suit land by way of efflux of time. In the said suit, they had obtained an ex parte decree dated 31.10.1986 from the Court of Shri N.S. Mundra, the then Additional Senior Sub Judge, Tarn Taran, against Assa Singh and Mangal Singh, the original mortgagors.

It was specifically averred that, at the time of institution of the aforesaid suit, Assa Singh and Mangal Singh had already expired and, therefore, the decree dated 31.10.1986 had been fraudulently obtained against deceased persons. The plaintiffs-appellants, being the legal heirs of the mortgagors, were neither impleaded nor heard in the said proceedings and, consequently, were not bound by the said decree. It was further pleaded that Ishar Kaur, Joga Singh and Niranjan Singh, who were plaintiffs in the earlier suit, had also since died, and their legal heirs and successors-in-interest, namely defendants No. 3 to 9, were impleaded in the present suit on that account.

On these premises, the plaintiffs-appellants asserted that the decree dated 31.10.1986 obtained by Sardul Singh, Shangara Singh and others was void, illegal, and not binding upon their rights. It was pleaded that the said decree did not affect their statutory and equitable right of redemption and that the plaintiffs-appellants, being the legal heirs