Gram Panchayat Village Behrhi vs Teju And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 16011 P&H

            RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr.                                                 [1]


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                                Date of Decision: December 7, 2022

            1.                                             RSA-1440-2018 (O&M)

            Gram Panchayat Village Behrhi, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur

                                                                       ........ Appellant
                                                    Versus

            Teju and others                                            ......... Respondents

            2.                                             RSA-1442-2018 (O&M)

            D.A.V. Public School, Behrhi through its Manager/ Headmistress Renu
            Trehan

                                                                       ........ Appellant
                                                    Versus

            Teju and others                                      ......... Respondents

            CORAM:             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

            Present:-          Mr. A.S. Dhindsa, Advocate for
                               Mr. K.S. Chahal, Advocate for the appellant
                               in RSA-1440-2018.
                               Ms.Deepshikha Arora, Advocate for
                               Mr. R.S. Cheema, Advocate for the appellant
                               in RSA-1442-2018.
                                                     ****

            HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

This order of mine shall dispose of two regular second appeals

bearing RSA No.1440 of 2018 (filed by Gram Panchayat Village Behrhi-

appellant/ defendant No.1) and RSA No. 1442-2018 (filed by DAG Public

School, Behrhi- appellant/ defendant No.2) arising out of the judgments

and decrees dated 10.09.2014 and 30.10.2017 passed by the Courts

below; whereby suit for possession filed at the instance of respondents

SANJAY GUPTA 2022.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr. [2]

No.1 to 7/ plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as 'respondents No.1 to 7) has

been decreed.

For convenience, facts are taken from RSA-1440-2018.

Brief facts of the case are that respondents No.1 to 7 filed a

suit for possession for land measuring 4 Kanal 1 Marla comprising in

Khasra No.27/1,Khewat No.58/83, Khatauni No.119 situated in Revenue

Estate of Village Behrhi, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, Harbast No.693.

It was pleaded in the plaint that predecessor-in-interest of

respondents No.1 to 7 were landless persons of Village Behrhi belonging

to Bazigar community and the suit property was allotted to the community

during consolidation proceedings which took place in the year 1955 for

the purposes of Gair Mumkin Abadi. It was further pleaded that

respondents No.1 to 7 through their predecessors built their houses over

the said land, however, the Gram Panchayat without there being authority

in law allotted the same to appellant/ defendant No.2 D.A.V. Public School

by way of 99 years lease which, by use of police force and misusing

personal influence demolished the houses of respondents No.1 to 7 and

occupied the suit property compelling them to file the present suit.

Upon notice, written statement has been filed at the instance

of the appellant (s) as well as proforma respondent No.8 herein raising

the plea of suit being barred under Section 13 of the Punjab Village

Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, (for short 'the Act'). The allotment

of the land in question to the Bazigar community at the time of

consolidation was also disputed and denied. The Gram Panchayat

supported having leased out the land in question, besides a large chunk of

other lands to the proforma respondent No.8 for a period of 99 years.

SANJAY GUPTA
2022.12.09 11:41
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
             RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr.                                                [3]

The trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 10.09.2014 decreed the

suit in favour of respondents No.1 to 7.

Aggrieved against the same, the appellant as well as proforma

respondent No.8 filed common appeal. The learned Appellate Court vide

judgment and decree dated 30.10.2017 dismissed the appeal filed at the

instance of appellant and proforma respondent No.8. It is the aforesaid

judgment and decree dated 30.10.2017 which has been impugned by the

appellant as well as proforma respondent No.8 by way of filing present

two Regular Second Appeals.

It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that suit filed

at the instance of respondents No.1 to 7 in their individual capacity was

not maintainable as they were claiming right in the suit property based on

allotment made in favour of the entire Bazigar community and as a

representative, suit was required to be filed. It has also been submitted

that respondents No.1 to 7 were not even residents of Village Behrhi and

could not have thus claimed any right over the property in question.

Learned counsel also submits that in the absence of any challenge to the

revenue entries from Bazigar community to the Gram Panchayat, suit

could not have been decreed in their favour particularly when the

jurisdiction of civil Court was barred.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have gone

through the paper book. I am unable to accept the submission made at

their instance.

Both the Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding of

fact that during consolidation proceedings, the land in question was

earmarked for Bazigar community and this was even finds recorded in the

SANJAY GUPTA 2022.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr. [4]

jamabandi for the year 1966-1967, wherein it has been reflected as "Gair

Mumkin Ababdi Makbooja Bazigar". The same entry has even been

reflected in the jamabandi for the year 1986-1987, however, in the later

revenue records, i.e. jamabandi for the year 2006-07, without there being

any order passed by any of the competent authority/Court, the said entry

has been changed to "Gair Mumkin Plot" for no reason at all. Both the

Courts below have found that no order passed by any of the competent

authorities has been produced or proved on record by the appellant as

well as proforma respondent No.8 so as to show under what

circumstances the change in the revenue record reflecting the suit

property to be "Gair Mumkin Abadi Makbooja Bazigar" was made to "Gair

Mumkin Plot".

Thus, I find no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings

recorded by the Courts below in this regard being based on Para 9.9 of

the Punjab Land Records Manual that enjoins the revenue authorities to

issue notice to all concerned before carrying out any change in the

revenue entries. Accordingly, the arguments raised at the instance of the

appellants as regards there being no challenge made to the change in the

revenue entries at the instance of respondents No.1 to 7 is also to be

rejected especially on the ground that the change made in the revenue

entries in favour of Gram Panchayat itself was bad in law being in

violation of the procedure laid down under Para 9.9 of the Punjab Land

Records Manual of granting opportunity or putting to notice to all

concerned and affected.

As regards the contention raised on behalf of the appellants

about the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, once the change in entries from

SANJAY GUPTA 2022.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr. [5]

"Gair Mumkin Abadi Makbooja" to "Gair Mumkin Plot" have been found to

be illegal and bad in law being in violation of the procedure laid down for

the said purpose, no question of title was involved in the present dispute,

thereby creating a bar of jurisdiction with the civil Court so as to entertain

the present dispute as the appellants cannot be permitted to take benefit

of their own wrong or the mistake committed by the revenue authorities by

putting respondents No.1 to 7 to a disadvantageous position.

I also find no merit in the contention raised on behalf of the

appellants to the effect that respondents No.1 to 7 were not residents of

Village Behrhi. A concurrent finding of fact based on voter list as well as

the statement made by PW3- Waryam Singh, Lambardar had been

recorded by both the Courts below that respondent No.1 to 7 were having

their houses and huts in the suit property.

On the contrary, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant

as well as proforma respondent No.8 so as to rebut the factum of

respondents No.1 to 7 being residents of the village being members of

Bazigar community. It may be relevant to point out here that once

respondents No.1 to 7 have been proved and found to be members of

Bazigar community, there was no legal impediment for them to have filed

suit for possession regarding the property earmarked for the common

purposes of benefit of their entire community.

In view of the discussion made hereinabove, I do not find any

illegally or perversity with the findings recorded by both the Courts below

which are purely factual in nature and based on proper appreciation of

evidence available on record and law applicable thereto, as such, no

question of law much less substantial question of law is involved in the

SANJAY GUPTA 2022.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-1440-2018 (O&M) & anr. [6]

present appeals warranting interference by this Court in exercise of power

under Section 100 of CPC.

Accordingly, the present appeals are dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other

connected appeal.

            December 7, 2022                                 ( HARKESH MANUJA )
            sanjay                                                 JUDGE

                                     Whether speaking/reasoned          Yes/No
                                         Whether Reportable             Yes/No




SANJAY GUPTA
2022.12.09 11:41
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document