After Khemka’s verdict, battle for 1.6 acres mortgaged over 100 years now reaches Punjab & Haryana High Court

An urgent need for Rs 90 in 1899

According to the Goyat family lore, Gurmail’s ancestor Biru Sandhu, a farmer in Majri Kalan, needed Rs 90 urgently “for reasons known only to him” in 1899. On June 17, 1899, Biru mortgaged 1.6 acres to moneylender Prabhu Mahajan. Gurmail says Mahajan mortgaged that land to Prabhu Dyal Jindal, a big moneylender of his time. In 1959, Gurmail’s ancestors migrated to Majri Kalan from the neighbouring Thol village after 17 acres belonging to Biru were transferred to his family “as Biru’s son was childless and we were his closest relatives”. Then, in 1976, Gurmail says, Jindal sold 9.6 acres — including Biru’s 1.6 acres — to the Sandhu family in the village for Rs 3,000 per acre.

Sitting on a charpai (cot) outside his brick house, Gurmail told The Indian Express, “Nearly five acres belonging to a relative from Tharoli village in Kurukshetra was stuck in a similar case, but he got his land back. His victory gave us hope. So we got copies of all documents related to the 1.6 acres from Kurukshetra revenue officials. We paid Rs 5,000 to get them translated from Urdu into Hindi.”

Gurmail, one of Biru’s nine successors, then hired a lawyer to file a case in the court of the Collector in Pehowa, nearly 25 km away. The Collector ruled in his favour, a verdict upheld by Ambala Commissioner Renu Phulia and then Khemka.

Less than 1 km from Gurmail’s house in Majri Kalan village is the house of Satish Sandhu, 48, who is engaged in a legal battle with him over the land. Sitting in his drawing room, Satish says, “How are we at fault? We simply bought the land from someone else. We are ready to return it if the value of Rs 90 in 1899 is given to us at today’s rates.”

Satish Sandhu, also a resident of Majri Kalan village, is engaged in a legal battle with Gurmail over the land. (Express Photo by Jasbir Malhi)

Before 2018, both families, which belong to the Jat community, say they shared cordial relations. “My family helped theirs (Gurmail’s) when they moved to the village. We even fought for them when they were involved in a dispute here,” says Satish,

Despite the short distance between their houses in the village, the fields owned by the two families share a common boundary. Gurmail says he ensures their legal battle is kept low-profile to “prevent tension” in the village. “Village residents only know that the two families are involved in a legal issue, nothing more,” says Neeraj, the son of the former village sarpanch.

The moneylenders who started it all

Meanwhile, there is mixed information available on the moneylenders involved in the sale and purchase of the embattled piece of land. Locals say not much is known about Mahajan, who had lent Biru Rs 90 in 1899 against his 1.6 acres. Locals say Mahajan’s family migrated from the neighbouring Rohti village to Majri Kalan long back.

In contrast, moneylender Jindal, who was from the neighbouring Jhansa village and who sold the land to the Sandhus in 1976, is well known. Though 10 of his successors have been made a party to the case, they don’t attend any hearings. “We have nothing to do with this case now since we sold the land to the Sandhus,” says Suresh Jindal, 86, Jindal’s grandson, seated on a teal sofa in his drawing room in Kurukshetra town.

While locals still talk about the influence of Jindal, a top moneylender of his time, Suresh claims that “even the then Nawab of Karnal would take loans from his grandfather”.

Suresh Jindal, the grandson of moneylender Prabhu Dyal Jindal, at his residence in Kurukshetra. (Express Photo by Jasbir Malhi)

Talking about his family’s influence, he claims, “Once, on the request of then Karnal Deputy Commissioner (a British officer), my family built a guest house in the area for his stay during hunting expeditions.”

Suresh also talks about his uncle Deshraj’s collection of cars, including Morris and Hillman till 1962. “Farmers would stop threshing when my uncle would cross the road nearby so that his car wouldn’t get dusty. In 1950, we had a staff of 40 persons at our haveli and over 100 animals.”

Like others in the village, Gurmail mentions Jindal’s armed Gorkha security personnel and their “temporary jail” in Jhansa village. Suresh is quick to clarify: “It was called a jail because the police would thrash the accused there.”

His relative Pawan Jindal, 62, adds, “ The family had four patwaris (revenue officials) to look after their land. The family used to hold panchayats in their haveli, which was spread over several acres, to settle local disputes. The ‘guilty’ were asked to work in the haveli along with other labourers. Those accused of theft were also kept there.”

Gurmail points towards the disputed land in Majri Kalan village. (Express Photo by Jasbir Malhi)

After Independence, Suresh’s father Puran Chand became the village sarpanch five-six times. “During his tenure, only five to seven cases would go to the police since the rest were disposed of in the village itself. If someone was found guilty, he was thrashed on the spot.”

As far as mortgaging land is concerned, Suresh says almost every farmer in every village has done it at some point to “meet their family’s needs or for a marriage or to buy an animal or additional land”. He adds, “But it is always difficult for them to get their mortgaged land back.”

“During Partition, when Muslims left for Pakistan, over 300 acres belonging to them was mortgaged to us. However, it could not be registered in our name due to a law introduced by Sir Chhotu Ram. Later, the government distributed that land among the locals,” says Suresh, adding, “Only in Jhansa village did the family own 100 acres.”

After the Punjab Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1938, was introduced by Sir Chhotu Ram, farmers were required to only submit an application to the District Collector to seek the restoration of their mortgaged land. Sir Chhotu Ram himself came from a debt-ridden family that owned 10 acres of arid land. While ordering the return of the land to the original owner’s successors in the case filed by Gurmail, Khemka quoted the 1938 legislation. “It must be kept in mind that the 1938 Act is a beneficial agrarian legislation for restitution of possession of mortgaged land to the landowners and providing relief to farmers from usurious moneylending practices,” mentioned Khemka.

Suresh says his family sold most of its land after Independence and its members moved across Haryana to establish businesses, which include building three cinema halls in Kurukshetra, Kaithal and Shahabad (Kurukshetra). By 2000, they owned just 70 acres, which has shrunk to 15 acres at present. Suresh said that land is given to farmers on annual contact for nearly Rs 7 lakh.

Four years ago — nearly a year after they moved to Kurukshetra — the family sold the village haveli.