Harchand Singh And ANR v. Financial Commissioner Rev Pb And ORS

Commissioner, Punjab.

7.

As regards the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners that while partitioning the land, petitioners' possession over Khasra Nos.1138 and 1141 has been disturbed and given to respondent No.5; it is observed that learned senior counsel for the petitioners has failed to place on record

any document(s) indicating that petitioners were in actual possession of Khasra Nos.1138 and 1141. Therefore, this contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is rejected.

8.

As regards the contention that respondent No.5 had claimed possession over Khasra No.1137, however, he has not been given the said area; it is observed from the site plan (Annexure R-5/3) that a compact block has been carved out for respondent No.5 (Darshan Singh), by allocating him some frontage on the road.

8.1 In case, Khasra No.1137 is to be allocated to the share of respondent No.5 (Darshan Singh) then he would be deprived of frontage on the main road and considering the shape of joint land, the balance area left in Khasra No.1136, would be a narrow strip of land. 8.2 Apparently, the block of respondent No.5 has been carved out in a manner so as to make a contiguous block of land with some frontage on the main road, which, in my considered view, is just and equitable and does not call for any interference.

10.

The present writ petition is accordingly, partly allowed and disposed of in the aforestated terms.

11.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.