R.S.A. No. 2971 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 2971 of 2011 (O & M) Date of decision:-23.12.2011 Jaswant Singh ...Appellant Versus Darshan Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the applicant-appellant. RITU BAHRI J. C.M. No.8206-C of 2011 Application is allowed and the delay of 312 days in filing the appeal is condoned. R.S.A. No.2917 of 2011 This appeal is against the concurrent findings of both the courts below that as per the Will (Ex.P2) dated 29.3.1982 in favour of Hardev Singh @ Gurdev Singh. He had given the exclusive right of Khasra No.911 to Darshan Singh, Khasra No.922 in favour of Jaswant Singh defendant and Khasra No.908 in favour of Balwant Singh. The remaining property was given in favour of plaintiff and defendant equally. However, due to some clerical mistake, mutation of the suit land comprised in Khasra No.911 was sanctioned in favour of defendants in equal shares. R.S.A. No. 2971 of 2011 -2- The Will dated 29.3.1982 (Ex.P2) is duly proved. Paramjeet Singh, the marginal witness of the Will while appearing as PW2 deposed that Hardev Singh was in sound disposing mind and good health at the time of execution of the Will. He had given his three plots separately in favour of his three sons and his agricultural land in favour of his three sons in equal shares. However, mutation (Ex.P1) was sanctioned on 30.8.1988. Once the Will has been duly proved as per the statement given by the marginal witness PW2-Paramjeet Singh, the mutation has been sanctioned as per the Will. The Will is not disputed by both the parties. The mutation was sanctioned wrongly in favour of both the plaintiff and the defendants on 30.8.1988. However, the suit was filed by the plaintiff on 14.8.2001 when he came to know about the wrong entry in the mutation. The suit is within limitation. Since the Will was duly proved, the plaintiff was held owner of the land measuring 0 Kanal 19 Marla comprised in Khata No.1222/1302 Khasra No.911 fully described in the headnote of the plaint. He is entitled to be recorded as owner of the land alongwith the house constructed over it. The defendants have been restrained from transferring the above land and house and also from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit property. No other point was argued by counsel for the appellant. No question of law much less substantial question of R.S.A. No. 2971 of 2011 -3- law arises for consideration before this Court. The regular second appeal is dismissed. 23.12.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE