Civil Appeal No. 7043 of 2012 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6324 of 2008). Case: Abdul Rehman and Anr. Vs Mohd. Ruldu and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)

Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 7043 of 2012 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6324 of 2008)
CounselFor Appellant: Manmeet Arora and Kavita Wadia, Advs. and For Respondents: Debasis Misra and Jitendra Kumar, Advs.
JudgesP. Sathasivam and Ranjan Gogoi, JJ.
IssueCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Section 151 - Order 6 Rule 17 - Order 39 Rule 1 - Order 39 Rule 2
Citation2013 (1) ALD 1 (SC), 2012 (95) ALR 602, 2012 (6) ALT 41 (SC), 2012 (6) AWC 5448 SC, 2012 (6) AWC 5448 SC, 2013 (1) CDR 182 (SC), 2013 (1) CHN 40, 115 (2013) CLT 624, 2012 (5) CTC 803, JT 2012 (10) SC 97, 2013 (1) LW 213, 2012 (4) RCR 481 (Civil), 2013 (118) RD 374, RLW 2013 (1) SC 29, 2012 (9) SCALE 582, 2012 (11) SCC 341, 2013 (1) WBLR 43 (SC)
Judgement DateSeptember 27, 2012
CourtSupreme Court (India)


P. Sathasivam, J.

  1. Leave granted.

  2. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 13.11.2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision No. 4486 of 2007 whereby the High Court dismissed the revision filed by the Appellants herein and confirmed the order dated 06.06.2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Malerkotla in an application filed by the Appellants herein for amendment of the plaint.

  3. Brief Facts:

    (a) Originally one Jhandu, resident of Village Haider Nagar, was the owner and in possession of land admeasuring 53 bighas 11 biswas at village Haider Nagar, Tehsil Malerkotla and 33 bighas 15 biswas situated at Village Binjoli Kalan, Tehsil Malerkotla. Jhandu died leaving behind Khuda Bux as his son and Aishan and Kaki as his daughters. The mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of Khuda Bux alone being his son.

    (b) Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid mutation, Kaki and Aishan (daughters of Jhandu) filed Suit No. 280/162 against Khuda Bux claiming 9/36 share each in the said lands before the subordinate Judge, Ist Class, Sangrur, Camp at Malerkotla. By order dated 20.12.1971, the sub-Judge dismissed the said suit.

    (c) Challenging the said judgment, Kaki and Aishan filed an appeal being Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1972 before the District Judge, Sangrur. Vide order dated 04.07.1972 passed by the District Judge, the said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. According to the terms of the compromise, it was agreed that Khuda Bux shall be entitled to retain possession of land admeasuring 34 Bighas 13 Biswas in village Haider Nagar with the condition that he and his wife Ramzanan will receive the produce of the suit land during their life time but they will have no right to alienate it by way of sale, mortgage or any other form. After the death of Khuda Bux and his wife, the said land would be divided among the four sons of Khuda Bux in equal shares. The remaining land owned by Khuda Bux in Binjoli and Haider Nagar was partitioned by him amongst his four sons in the manner set out in the compromise deed.

    (d) On 12.09.1986, Khuda Bux executed a sale deed transferring ownership and possession of land admeasuring 17 Bighas and 10 biswas in village Haider Nagar in favour of the Appellants herein. Challenging the said sale deed, the other two sons and two daughters of Khuda Bux filed a suit before the sub-Judge, Malerkotla. The sub-Judge dismissed the said suit and set aside the sale deed dated 12.09.1986. The said order was further confirmed in appeal.

    (e) After the death of Khuda Bux, Ramzanan - his wife filed Suit No. 308 of 2002 before the Civil Judge, Malerkotla for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against all her children. In the above suit, on 24.12.2002, she also filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") seeking an injunction against the Appellants herein from interfering with her possession. The said application was dismissed. Against the dismissal of the said application, she filed an appeal being C.M.A. No. 7 of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
10 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT