Amarjit Kaur & Ors. v. Karamvir Singh & Ors.

The facts revolve around a legal dispute involving two parties, the appellants and the respondents, who are successors of a common ancestor named Ajit Singh. The respondents filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration that they owned a 17/24 share of a disputed piece of land, owned by their ancestor at the time of consolidation. They claimed that Ajit Singh had sold the land to someone named Bishan Singh without any legal necessity or consideration.

The appellants, who are descendants  (successors) of Joginder Singh, filed a lawsuit to declare the sale of the land by Ajit Singh as void, arguing that it had no effect on their reversionary rights (it is where upon the happening or non- happening of a prescribed event, ownership of the property will revert back to the previous owner). The plaintiffs contended that certain entries related to the land were incorrect and did not affect their rights, as they had acquired a 17/24 share in the land upon Ajit Singh's death in 1986. They claimed that a previous court decree, which was not binding on them as they were not parties to the compromise, supported their claim. The plaintiffs had requested the defendants to acknowledge their claim, but their request was unsuccessful. Consequently, they filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration and possession of the land.

The High Court had previously ruled that the sale to Bishan Singh was void and would not impact Joginder Singh's reversionary rights after Ajit Singh's death. However, in the current court proceedings, only Joginder Singh was a party and he had reached a compromise with Bishan Singh, resulting in a court decree in his favour. Based on this decree, Joginder Singh claimed ownership of the disputed land. Hence, this appeal.

The Supreme Court held that the challenge in this appeal is to the legality of the judgment rendered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in second appeal filed under Section 100 of the CPC. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the high courts in relation to the aspect of no modification of the terms of declaration, thereby the sale not affecting the reversionary rights of Joginder Singh, meaning the property in dispute would be inherited by all the heirs of Ajit Singh.

The court also held that the compromise decree (where the parties to the dispute consents to settle the matter amicably and the same is recorded by the court) was a genuine transaction, and it entitled Joginder Singh exclusively to possess and alter all records regarding the new ownership and formally acknowledge and manage all tenants under the new ownership. The compromise entered into between Joginder Singh and Bishan Singh has no effect on the rights of the plaintiffs. Their rights were protected by this Court in dismissing the appeal of Bishan Singh against them. Joginder Singh became entitled to the possession of the suit land immediately after paying the said amount, which otherwise could have been taken by him only after the death of Ajit Singh. Additionally, the court dismissed the appeal stating, the same had no merit, if Joginder Singh had spent any money as claimed.