Habib Khan vs Delhi Milk Scheme
2024 Latest Caselaw 18998 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Habib Khan vs Delhi Milk Scheme on 28 October, 2024

Author: Alka Sarin

Bench: Alka Sarin

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141535




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


202                                            RSA-458-1995 (O&M)
                                               Date of Decision : 28.10.2024


Habib Khan (deceased) through LRs                               ....Appellants

                                    VERSUS

Delhi Milk Scheme                                             ....Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN


Present :   Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate for the appellants.

            Ms. Geeta Singhwal, Advocate
            Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India


ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and

decree dated 28.10.1994 passed by the First Appellate Court whereby it was

held that the plaintiff-appellant i.e. Habib Khan was in unauthorized

possession of the suit property, and he could be dispossessed in due course

of law.

2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-

appellant herein filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming himself to

being owner in possession of the suit land situated within the revenue estate

of village Nakanpur, Tehsil Ferozepur Jhirka, District Gurugram fully

described in para 1 of the plaint. On notice the suit was contested by the

defendant-respondent raising preliminary objections. On merits it was the

stand taken that the suit property stood acquired vide notification dated

31.07.1968 and that Rapat Roznamcha was also prepared and possession

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141535

RSA-458-1995 -2-

was taken on 15.11.1968 (Ex.D1). It was further the case set up that the

award dated 13.03.1970 was also passed and that the compensation stands

paid to the plaintiff-appellant. The Trial Court decreed the suit restraining

the defendant-respondent from interfering in the peaceful possession of the

plaintiff-appellant over the suit property except in due course of law vide

judgment and decree dated 03.06.1992. Aggrieved by the same, the

defendant-respondent preferred an appeal and vide judgment and decree

dated 28.10.1994 the same was partly allowed and it was held that the

plaintiff-appellant was not owner of the suit land and that he was in

unauthorized possession of the suit land and could be dispossessed in due

course of law. Aggrieved by the same, the present regular second appeal has

been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant.

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant would contend that

except for the Rapat Roznamcha all the other documents produced by the

defendant-respondent were marked documents and hence the appeal ought to

have been dismissed by the First Appellate Court.

4. Per contra learned counsel for the defendant-respondent has

handed over a copy of the judgment passed by this Court in RSA-698-2013

titled "Bhagwan Dass & Ors. vs. Delhi Milk Scheme & Ors." wherein on

similar facts the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 15.05.2018.

5. Heard.

6. In the present case the suit land was acquired on 31.07.1968

and the award was passed on 13.03.1970. Learned counsel for the defendant-

respondent has laid much stress on the fact that even the compensation

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141535

RSA-458-1995 -3-

stands paid and though the other documents are marked documents however

the same can always be looked into and taken judicial note of. Learned

counsel for the plaintiff-appellant is not in a position to deny the fact that

Bhagwan Dass and the present plaintiff-appellant had filed similar suits and

that the appeal filed by Bhagwan Dass being RSA-698-2013 stands

dismissed by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2018.

7. In view of the findings returned by both the Courts that the suit

property stood acquired by the defendant-respondent and also coupled with

the fact that the Rapat Roznamcha entry was duly proved by the Patwari

while stepping into the witness-box as DW1, no fault can be found with the

judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court.

8. In view of the above, I do not find any merits in the present

appeal no question of law much less substantial question of law arises in the

present case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if

any, also stand disposed off.

( ALKA SARIN ) 28.10.2024 JUDGE jk

NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO

3 of 3