Punjab Land Records Manual -- Chapter 4.23 - Tatima Shajra - Preparation of - Challenge to - Delay - Tatima is required to be prepared at spot at time of carrying out mutation, which has been done in this case - It was prepared in year 1996 - Petitioner has chosen to raise challenge only in 2010 without explaining delay - Held, this alone would be enough to decline prayer..........
Mutation -- A mutation of revenue entries on basis of Will - Held, cannot transfer title to the property - Revenue entries are at best only subsidiary evidence, when issue of an assertion to title to the property is made...........
East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949, Rule 16(ii), 13 -- Panchayat land - Transfer to District Red Cross Society - Validity - Resolution passed by Gram Panchayat was a mere proposal - It was not placed for approval before State Govt. in terms of R.13 of the 1964 Rules - Held, it did not lead to a transfer of title - Revenue..........
Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, Section 31 -- Mutation proceedings - Pendency of dispute before Civil Court - Effect - Held, mutation proceedings cannot be kept in abeyance during pendency of dispute before Civil Court - Revenue officers are duty bound in terms of statute to enter mutations in exercise of their administrative functions...........
Will -- Suspicious circumstances - Will executed in the year 1971 but produced for the first time in 1989 - Scribe did not produce the register in which Will was entered nor produced the entries therein - Will not got registered though office of Sub Registrar was at a distance of 10-15 yards - Scribe interested witness as his brother is son-in-law of propounder - Signature..........
Practice and Procedure -- Weakness of defendant's case - Effect - Lower Appellate Court instead of considering the case of plaintiff and question as to whether plaintiffs have been able to prove their possession approached the case and decided that defendants failed to prove the identity of the lands involved in earlier suit and present suit and that the defence is barred..........
Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, Section 4, Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, Section 3 -- Shamlat deh - Vesting in Gram Panchayat - Held, any land which vests in Panchayat under shamilat law shall be deemed to have been vested in Panchayat under the Act of 1961 - `Shamilat law' means the Act of 1953 - Thus, land which vested in..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 7, Rule 11(d), Limitation Act, 1963, Section 17 -- Rejection of plaint - Respective plaintiffs had knowledge with respect to the transaction in the year 1999 and even in the year 2004, when RTS Appeals were preferred challenging the Mutation Entries in favour of defendants and even with respect to the alleged forgery in the year 2004 when..........
Ownership -- Claim on basis of occupancy right - Defendant was recorded to be occupancy tenant over suit land in revenue record - Even, defendant became owner of suit land on coming into force of Punjab Occupancy Tenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act and mutation was also sanctioned in favour of defendant depicting it as owner of suit land - There is no evidence to..........
Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, Section 111 -- Private partition - Proof - Held, merely on the basis of entry of mutation, which was never sanctioned, it cannot be said that there was any private partition among co-sharers of total joint land - Non-sanctioning of mutation regarding alleged private partition and no, reflection thereof in revenue record for five long decades..........
