Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1959 Page 1 of about 35 results (0.023 seconds)

Apr 21 1959 (HC)

Labh Singh Vs. Chief Settlement Commissioner (Rural) Punjab, Jullundur ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-21-1959

Reported in : AIR1959P& H575

orderi.d. dua, j.1. this writ petition has been filed on the following allegations: the petitioner alleges to be a displaced person from west punjab which is now in pakistan. before the parlition of the country, the petitioner purchased land measuring 11 3/4 killas for a sum of rs. 17,460/- from a muslim named allah yar khan son of jamal din in chak no 32 (j. b.) tehsil and district lyallpur by means of a registered sale deed dated 23rd of may 1946 and the relevant mutation no. 134 had also been duly sanctioned by the tehsildar in the petitioner's name.the said mutation was. however, later cancelled by the collector on 9th of june 1947; the petitioner alleges that this cancellation was illegal. a second appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the collector was still pending before the commissioner, multan division, when the country was partitioned in august 1947 and the petitioner was compelled to migrate to india. the custodian department in india after fully satisfying itself about the petitioner's title over the aforesaid land allotted to the petitioner 10 standard acres and 10 1/2 units of land in village bhoewal in lieu of the above area.allotment sanad no. ami/201/69 dated 8th of july 1956 is relied upon by the petitioner in sup-port of his allotment and he submits that in due course of time when evacuee property was acquired by the centra! government under section 12 of the displaced persons (compensation and rehabilitation) act, 1954, proprietary .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1959 (HC)

Om Prakash and anr. Vs. Mansa and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-19-1959

Reported in : AIR1959P& H626

harbans singh, j.1. on 8th of june, 1883, mam chand father of the present defendants mortgaged the land in suit measuring 13 bighas and 12 biswas in favour of prem sukh, lachhman and parbhu for a sum of rs. 300/-. prem sukh having died the remaining mortgagees sold the mortgagee rights to plaintiffs, mansa and ratti ram, sons of phulu, and made a report to the patwari of their having done so. on the basis of this report which was not signed by the original mortgagees, a mutation was entered and later the mortgagees being absent, interrogatories were issued to them enquiring about the transfer of the mortgagee rights.these interrogatories appear to have been received back on the basis of which the mutation was sanctioned and exhibit p. 5 is the copy of the mutation. an application under section 4 of the punjab restitution of mortgaged lands act by the defendants was dismissed on 2nd of may, 1950, on the ground that the mortgage in question was more than sixty years old. the suit, out of which the present appeal has arisen, was filed by the plaintiffs, mansa and ratti ram, the transferees from the original mortgagees for a declaration that they have become owners of the property in disputeby efflux of time and that the defendants' right of redemption, no longer exists.the main issue in the case was whether the mortgage in question has been duly acknowledged within limitation and for that reason the period of limitation for redemption of the mortgage by the defendants has not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 05 1959 (HC)

Kundan and ors. Vs. Sardara Ramji Lal and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-05-1959

Reported in : AIR1959P& H206

i.d. dua, j.1. the only question arising for consideration in this appeal is whether or not the present suit is barred by section 44 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act of 1948. jn so far as the merits are concerned the learned counsel for the appellants has conceded that there, is no substance in the appeal. the question of jurisdiction is also being raised on second appeal for the first time.the plaintiffs have brought the present suit for a declaration that they along with defendants 26 to 32 were exclusive owners of the land described in para 3 of the plaint and for a permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 to 25 and 33 to 35 from interfering with the plaintiffs' ownership and possession of the said land. it was pleaded that the plaintiffs and defendants 26 to 32 were descendants of bahala whereas defendants 1 to 25 and 33 to 35 were descendants of mehru who were real brothers and were joint owners of the land situate in village sarai kuhand and in patties jasu and jawahara har kishan of village was further alleged that the ancestors of the parties got partition of the joint land in village sarai kohand and village kohand effected through court sometime in 1910 and mutation was entered on the basis of the said partition; while mutations nos. 20 and 21 relating to village kohand were sanctioned, mutation no. 19 relating to village sarai kohand was rejected by the revenue authorities under some is also .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 13 1959 (HC)

Smt. Sukhi W/O Mahan Singh Vs. Baryam Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-13-1959

Reported in : AIR1959P& H339

dua, j.1. the circumstances in which this case has been referred to full bench are these.2. the parties to this litigation are tats of kharar tehsil, district ambak, and sawan, the last male holder of the property in dispute, died some time in the year 1947. the plaintiffs who are sawan's sisters have filed the present suit for possession of the land (fully described in the plaint) as heirs entitled to succeed to their brother sawan's property according to the custom of the tribe. it may be stated that on the death of sawan the mutation was effected in favour of the defendants on the ground that they were collaterals and were, therefore, entitled to succeed.the plaintiffs allege that the mutation has been wrongly sanctioned in favour of the defendants and they (the plaintiffs) being the preferential heirs to the non-ancestral property left by their deceased brother were entitled to claim possession. jit singh, one of the defendants, though served, did not come to contest the suit and was, therefore, proceeded against ex parte. waryam singh and rulia singh, defendants nos. 1 and 2, alone contested the suit and in their joint written statement they admitted that the plaintiffs were the sisters of sawan deceased the last mate owner of the suit property, but denied the plaintiffs' claim to be preferential heirs.they admitted that the parries were governed by the general zamindara custom in matters of succession but they asserted that according to the correct rule of custom the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 1959 (HC)

Waryam Singh Vs. Chanan Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-29-1959

Reported in : AIR1960P& H308

(1) the present appeal arises out of a sale of 66 kanals 16 marls of land sold by sunder singh to chanan singh, hakim singh and others for a sum of rs. 10,000/- by a sale-deed executed on 30th of september, 1955, but registered on 5th of december, 1955. waryam singh plaintiff-appellant brother of suder singh filed a suit for pre-emption of this land. kehar singh filed a suit for pre-emption of this land. kehar singh and others also filed a rival pre-emption suit presumably after waryam singh had filed the suit; the suit number of waryam singh being 749 & that of kehar singh and others being 889. these two suits came to be consolidated and were heard together. waryam singh plaintiff was granted a decree for possession and it was directed that if he failed to pay the sale-price, the rival pre-emptors would be entitled to possession on payment of the sale-price. the vendee did not contest the decision but the rival pre-emptors kehar singh and others filed an appeal before the learned district judge, ferozepur. having come to the conclusion that waryam singh had waived his right to file the suit for pre-emption, the lower appellate court allowed the appeal of kehar singh and others and granted them a decree for possession on payment of the sale-price.(2) waryam singh has come in appeal to this court and the short question for determination is whether the appellant had waived his right to bring a suit for pre-emption. the plea of waiver is founded on the presence of waryam singh .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 1959 (HC)

Girdharilal Vs. Krishan Datt

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-30-1959

Reported in : AIR1960P& H575

dua, j.(1) this is a defendants appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned district judge, kapurthala, dated 8th of may 1952 allowing the appeal and decreeing the suit of plaintiff krishan dutt which had been dismissed by the subordinate judge 1st class, fatehgarh sahib, by his judgment dated 8th august, 1951. the plaintiff and the defendant are real brothers, and their father admittedly died in 1928. the property in suit consists of 49 bighas and 6 biswas of land situated in village nabipur kalan; this property originally belonged to the erstwhile kalsia state and was put to auction sometime in september 1931. plaintiff krishan dutt gave a bid for this property in the joint names of himself and his brother girdhari lal for a sum of rs. 4,200/- which was accepted.a sale certificate was consequently issues in october 1931, in favour of both the brothers, and on 8th of september 1932 mutation no. 249 was similarly attested in their favour. it appears that at the time of the mutation their mother alone was present, both the brothers being absent. it is also agreed that the defendant was born on 16th of july 1916, with the result that he was minor in september 1931 when the property was purchased. the present suit was instituted on 1st of july 1943 claiming declaration and possession with respect to the aforesaid land on the ground that it was the plaintiff who had paid the whole amount from his own pocket and secured the sale certificate as also possession of land a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 1959 (HC)

Arjan Singh and anr. Vs. Dalip Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-27-1959

Reported in : AIR1960P& H33

(1) attra had two sons dalip singh plaintiff and ishar singh defendant no. 5. during his lifetime attra executed a will dated 24th of december, 1944 bequeathing the whole of his landed property to arjan singh, nirmal singh, naranjan singh and sadhu singh sons of dalip singh to the exclusion of his own sons dalip singh and ishar singh. this will was got registered on 7th of october, 1946. on 15th of july, 1947 attra died and on his death his landed property was mutated in the names of his grandsons, arjan singh, nirmal singh, naranjan singh and sadhu singh sons of dalip singh. dalip singh took the matter in appeal and the order of the revenue officer was set aside, with the result that the mutation was ultimately effected in the names of dalip singh and ishar singh. notwithstanding the mutation in his favour dalip singh could not get possession of the land, with the result that he had to institute a suit for possession of the land left by his father. in this suit be claimed possession of the whole land as against his own sons as well as against his brother ishar singh. during the course of litigation ishar singh applied for being transposed as a plaintiff; this prayer was granted and he was arrayed as a co-plaintiff in the suit. later ishar singh withdrew the suit with respect to his half share in the land left by his father attra and the suit of dalip singh was decreed with respect to possession of the remaining one-half share. (2) the sons of dalip singh preferred an appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1959 (HC)

Ramla Baldev Vs. Kiran Singh Mangat and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-04-1959

Reported in : AIR1960P& H420

1. the land in dispute measuring 14 bighas and 6 biswas was in possession of ramla and ram sarup, real brothers, as occupancy tenants under s. 8 of the punjab tenancy act (no 16 of 1887). in the year 1929, part of this land was mortgaged by both the brothers to one tota and others, the landlords. in the year 1940, the balance of the land was also mortgaged by them to karam singh and others, the landlords, with the result that the entire land stood mortgaged with the landlords. on the basis of a statement made by ram sarup, he relinquished his rights of occupancy in favour of the landlords and thereon a mutation was followed which was sanctioned on the 31st of january 1944 (exhibit d-5). ramla applied to the collector under the punjab redemption of mortgage act (no. ii of 1913) for the redemption of the entire land.the collector ordered redemption of the land to the extent of his share. he disallowed the redemption qua the share of the land held by ram sarup. dissatisfied with this order of the collector, ramla filed the present two suits for possession by redemption of the entire land on the allegation that ram sarup was issueless and had not been heard of for seven years and so he should be presumed dead, and accordingly he was also entitled to get possession of the share of the land mortgaged by ram sarup by succession according to the rule of was also placed that ram sarup had never abandoned his share of the occupancy tenancy in favour of the landlords, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1959 (HC)

Bishan Singh Kala Singh and ors. Vs. Mastan Singh Sarup Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-27-1959

Reported in : AIR1960P& H26

(1) this is a defendants' appeal directed against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the two courts below declaring that the plaintiff has become full and complete owner of the land in suit as the impugned mortgage has not be redeemed within the statutory period of 60 years and the defendants' right of redemption has been extinguished. it is alleged that deva singh, the original owner, mortgaged the land in question to kahan singh for a sum of rs. 160/- vide a mutation attested on 10-8-1884 and that these mortgagee rights were later transferred to one sarwan singh, who, in his turn, transferred them to the plaintiff. deva singh is said to have died issueless and his rights were inherited by the owners of the patti. the mortgage having never been redeemed, it has been claimed by the plaintiff that the right of redemption has been lost by the expiry of more than 60 years and that he has thus become the exclusive owner of the suit-land. the courts below have held that the mortgage in question is more than 60 years' old and having not been redeemed, the right of redemption has been extinguished and the plaintiff has become the absolute owner of the and in suit. two points were raised in the courts below and the same have been re-agitated before me at the bar. it is contended on behalf of the appellant that the mutations by which the mortgagee rights were transferred amount to an acknowledgment of the mortgage and therefore fresh period of limitation should be deemed to have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1959 (HC)

Gobind and ors. Vs. Chhajjan and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-25-1959

Reported in : AIR1961P& H202

d.k. mahajan, j.1. the short question in this second appeal is whether by giving up a part of the property mortgaged, there is novation of the contract of mortgage. 2. the land in dispute, along with khasra no. 7800, was mortgaged by balwant to ram parshad for a sum of rs. 35 some time before 1877, and the mortgage was with possession. in the year 1906 the mortgagee gave up possession of khasra no. 7800 on the plea that the profits of the land had been excessive, and mutation of this khasra number was entered in the name of the mortgagor free from all encumbrances. on balwant's death the plaintiff inherited 1/8th share of the mortgaged land, while the remaining 7/8th chare was inherited by the defendants. on the 2nd january 1933 the present suit was filed by the plaintiff, who is the successor-in-interest of the mortgagee, that the defendants, who are the successor-in-interest of the mortgagor, had lost their right of redemption by the lapse of 60 years, and that under section 28 of the indian limitation act the plaintiff had become owner of the suit land. to this suit the defence was that the mortgage was not more than sixty years old and that, in any case, there were acknowledgments by the mortgagee which saved limitation. on the 1st june 1954, the trial court dismiss-ed the suit, leaving the parries to their own costs. it held that there was a novation of contract and that a fresh mortgage came into being in the year 1906 by reason of the mutation whereby khasra no. 7800 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //