R. S. A. No. 1334 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : R. S. A. No. 1334 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : May 13, 2011 Bachan Singh .... Appellant Vs. Swaran Singh and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. R. D. Bawa, Advocate for the appellant. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : C. M. No. 3734-C of 2011 : Allowed as prayed for. Main Appeal : Plaintiff Bachan Singh, who was successful in the trial court, but has been non-suited by the lower appellate court, has filed the instant second appeal. Case of the plaintiff-appellant is that his predecessors Ato and Chattar Singh sold suit land measuring 23 kanals 10 marlas to Isshar Singh – father of defendant no.1 and grandfather of defendants no.2 to 4, vide sale R. S. A. No. 1334 of 2011 (O&M) 2 deed dated 12.12.1939. The plaintiff challenged the said sale under custom on the ground that the suit land was ancestral and sale was without consideration and legal necessity. The said suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 06.01.1948. Plaintiff's father Fauja Singh died on 09.09.1998 and thereupon, the plaintiff has become entitled to seek possession of the suit land pursuant to declaratory decree dated 06.01.1948. Isshar Singh – vendee has been inherited by defendants herein. Accordingly, the plaintiff sought possession of the suit land on payment of Rs.658/- as per declaratory decree. Defendants denied knowledge of sale deed dated 12.12.1939 and of the previous litigation. Defendants, however, pleaded that they are not liable to deliver possession of the suit land to the plaintiff, who has no locus standi to file the suit. All plaint averments were broadly denied. Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Batala, vide judgment and decree dated 25.08.2006, decreed the plaintiff's suit. However, first appeal preferred by the defendants has been allowed by learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Gurdaspur, vide judgment and decree dated 16.12.2010 and thereby, suit filed by the plaintiff stands dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiff has filed the instant second appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file. R. S. A. No. 1334 of 2011 (O&M) 3 Punjab Custom (Power to Contest) Act, 1920 (in short – the Principal Act) has been amended by Punjab Custom (Power to Contest) Amendment Act, 1973 (in short – the Amendment Act) and thereby, enforcement of customary right under the Principal Act has been abrogated. A Division Bench of this Court in judgment dated 31.03.2010 in R. S. A. No. 964 of 1978 titled Kamakar Singh etc. vs. Didar Singh etc. has held that declaratory decree, even if obtained prior to the Amendment Act, is not enforceable after the enforcement of the Amendment Act. In view thereof, the plaintiff in the instant case, cannot succeed and has been rightly non-suited by the lower appellate court. In addition to the aforesaid, the suit is also not within limitation. Learned counsel for the appellant states that vendor Ato died in the year 1939 itself, whereas vendor Chattar Singh died in the year 1941. In the declaratory suit instituted by the plaintiff, Khemi – widow of Ato was impleaded as defendant no.3, whereas plaintiff's father Fauja Singh was impleaded as defendant no.2. Consequently, immediate heirs of Ato and Chattar Singh – vendors could seek possession of the suit land after their death. The plaintiff claims possession of the suit land on the ground that his father Fauja Singh has died on 09.09.1998, and therefore, the suit is within limitation. The contention cannot be accepted. Right to seek possession of the suit land accrued to immediate heirs of vendors Ato and Chattar Singh, immediately after their death. The plaintiff, after expiry of more than five R. S. A. No. 1334 of 2011 (O&M) 4 decades, cannot claim possession of the suit land from the original vendees on the ground that plaintiff's father has now died on 09.09.1998. The plaintiff has no locus standi or right to seek possession of the suit land because the said right accrued to the immediate heirs of vendors Ato and Chhatar Singh on their death. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant second appeal. Plaintiff has been rightly non-suited by the lower appellate court. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for adjudication in this second appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine. May 13, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE