In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936 of 1996 (O&M) ..... Date of decision:9.11.2009 Hardev Singh and others .....Petitioners v. Additional Director, Consolidation, Punjab, Mohali and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. H.S. Gill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. S.D. Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.3. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The writ petition was earlier filed by Hardev Singh, Kuldip Singh and Karnail Singh sons of Isher Singh seeking quashing of the orders dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) and the order dated 20.5.1996 (Annexure- P.3) passed by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, Mohali (respondent No.1). Chiranji Lal Sharma, the predecessor-in-interest of Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2) and Raghbar Dayal (since deceased and represented by his LRs and sons Sukhdev Sharma, Ashok Kumar and Vinod Kumar filed a civil suit seeking declaration that he was the owner in possession of land measuring 22 Kanals 4 Marlas situated in Village Allaur, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana. According to him the petitioners and CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936/1996 (O&M) [2] other defendants in the said suit had no right, title or interest in the suit property. The learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Samrala vide judgment dated 23.7.1984 dismissed the said suit filed by Chiranji Lal Sharma, the predecessor-in-interest of Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2). In appeal the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana vide judgment dated 24.11.1987 affirmed the judgment of the learned trial Court. Thereafter, Regular Second Appeal No.788 of 1988 was filed by Chiranji Lal Sharma and the LRs of Raghbar Dayal in this Court which was also dismissed vide judgment dated 22.2.1994 (Annexure-P.1). Thereafter, Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2) filed a petition under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (`Act' – for short) before the Additional Director, Consolidation (respondent No.1). In the said petition Panna Lal son of Kundan Lal was impleaded as a respondent. Panna Lal was defendant No.1 in the aforementioned civil suit. The petitioners were not impleaded as a party in the said petition filed by respondent No.2 before the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings (respondent No1.). The Additional Director Consolidation vide order dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) allowed the petition. The names of Rajinder Pal, Vijay Kumar, Krishan Pal and Baldev Krishan sons of Chiranji Lal as also Sukhdev Sharma, Ashok Kumar, Vinod Kumar sons of Raghbar Dayal were ordered to be recorded in the Khana Kashat (column of cultivation) of the Jamabandi in respect of Khewat Nos.197 and 198. The case was remanded to the Consolidation Officer for carrying out the necessary correction. Hardev Singh (petitioner No.1) then filed a petition under Section 42 of the CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936/1996 (O&M) [3] Act seeking review of the order dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) as he was not a party to the same. The said petition was dismissed by the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab vide order dated 20.5.1996 (Annexure-P.3). Aggrieved against the same the present petition has been filed, which was admitted by this Court on 18.9.1997. Hardev Singh (petitioner No.1) died and his son and LR Gurpreet Singh was impleaded in his place vide order dated 10.1.2000 passed in CM No.11 of 2000. During the pendency of the petition CM No.2590 of 2007 was filed by the applicant Anil Ghai son of Norata Ram under Order 22 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for being impleaded as a party being assignee of the property in dispute. It was claimed by the applicant Anil Ghai son of Norata Ram that he has purchased the land measuring 24 Kanals 1 Marla vide sale deed dated 15.12.2006 (Annexure- A.1). The mutation in respect of the said purchase has also been sanctioned in favour of Anil Ghai-applicant. A reply to CM No.2590 of 2007 was filed by respondent No.2, wherein it has been stated that a fictitious sale deed has been set up and in any case it is void as the seller himself was not the owner of the land sold. This Court vide order dated 31.7.2008 ordered that the said CM No.2590 of 2007 shall be heard along with the writ petition at the time of final hearing. CM No.18100 of 2009 has been filed by Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2) praying for disposal of the writ petition in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The joint affidavit dated 25.10.2009 (Annexure-A.1) has been deposed by (1) Rajinder Pal Sharma (respondent No.2), (2) Ashok Kumar Sharma and (3) Vinod Kumar Sharma CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936/1996 (O&M) [4] sons of late Raghbar Dayal Sharma, (4) Vijay Kumar Sharma, (5) Baldev Krishan Sharma and (6) Krishan Pal Sharma sons of Chiranji Lal Sharma, (7) Smt. Kamlesh Rani widow of Sh. Sukhdev Sharma, (9) Sarita Sharma and (10) Nisha Sharma daughters of late Sukhdev Sharma. It is stated by the deponents of the said joint affidavit dated 25.10.2009 that they have compromised the matter with Anil Ghai son of Sh. Norata Ram Ghai and they have received various amounts, the details of which are mentioned in the joint affidavit as full and final payment. They have accepted that Anil Ghai and others have become the exclusive owners and in possession of the property measuring 22 Kanals 4 Marlas as detailed in para 1 of the said joint affidavit. It is also stated that the said deponents and their heirs have no right, title or interest including possessory rights in the property as detailed in the joint affidavit. In view of the said joint affidavit and compromise Mr. S.D. Bansal, Advocate appearing for Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2) stated that he has no objection in case CM No.2590 of 2007 filed by the applicant- Anil Ghai under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC is allowed. Accordingly, CM No.2590 of 2007 is allowed. Applicant-Anil Ghai is substituted as petitioner to the writ petition in place of the earlier petitioner Gurpreet Singh (LR and son of Hardev Singh) as also Kuldip Singh and Karnail Singh sons of Isher Singh. Notice of CM No.18100 of 2009 to the petitioner Anil Ghai. Mr. Anil Rawat, Advocate appearing for the petitioner-Anil Ghai accepts notice. It is accepted position by Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate appearing CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936/1996 (O&M) [5] for the petitioner Anil Ghai that the matter has been compromised in terms of the joint affidavit dated 25.10.2009. Anil Ghai and others now have possessory rights. Therefore, it is prayed that the writ petition be disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. Insofar as Panna Lal (respondent No.3) is concerned, it is stated by both the counsel that Panna Lal (respondent No.3) has no interest in the land as he has sold his rights in the land to his mother Smt. Bhano who further sold her interest to Hardev Singh and other petitioners. The petitioner-Anil Ghai, it is stated, has thereafter purchased the interest of Panna Lal as well vide sale deed dated 15.12.2006 (Annexure-A.1). In terms of the compromise arrived at, which is recorded in the joint affidavit dated 25.10.2009 Anil Ghai and others now have possessory rights. It is agreed that the orders dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) and 20.5.1996 (Annexure-P.3) passed by the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings be set aside. It is stated by learned counsel for the parties that the parties are liable to be placed in the same position as was held by this Court vide judgment dated 22.2.1994 (Annexure-P.1) passed in RSA No.788 of 1988. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that it is admitted case between the parties that the orders dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) and 20.5.1996 (Annexure-P.3) were passed by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, Mohali in contravention of the judgment dated 22.2.1994 (Annexure-P.1) passed by this Court in RSA No.788 of 1988. Now the interest of the petitioners CM No.2590 of 2007 and CM No.18100 of 2009 and C.W.P. No.17936/1996 (O&M) [6] Gurpreet Singh LR and son of Hardev Singh as also Kuldip Singh and Karnail Singh sons of Isher Singh has been purchased by Anil Ghai (petitioner) vide sale deed dated 15.12.2006. The interest of Panna Lal (respondent No.3) was sold to his mother Smt. Bhano who in turn sold it to Hardev Singh and others the original petitioners. Anil Ghai-petitioner has purchased the interest of Panna Lal also through Gurpreet Singh, Kuldip Singh and Karnail Singh vide sale deed dated 15.12.2006. Besides, joint affidavit has been deposed by the successors-in-interest of Chiranji Lal Sharma and Raghbar Dayal Sharma wherein the possessory rights have been given to Anil Ghai and others on the receipt of necessary consideration. Therefore, the matter having been amicably settled which is in the interest of both the parties it would be just and expedient to accept the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 9.11.1995 (Annexure-P.2) and 20.5.1996 (Annexure-P.3) passed by the Additional Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab, Mohali are set aside and Rajinder Sharma (respondent No.2) and other deponents shall be bound by the joint affidavit dated 25.10.2009 deposed by them. November 9, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp* NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not:No