Dismissed

Gian Singh & Ors. v. Joginder Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Dec 2008RSA/272/1982

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the joint possession decree of 5/12 share in suit land. The court relied on a Full Bench judgment (Mihan vs. Inder) which answered the substantial question of law against the appellants, upholding the lower courts' decision that the gift deed did not affect the respondent's rights.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Gian Singh & Ors. Vs Joginder Singh — Partition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

RSA No.272 of 1982 Date of Decision: 12.12.2008

¶3

Gian Singh and others

.... Appellants

vs.

Joginder Singh

.... Respondent

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajive Bhalla.

¶9

Present: Mr. Sarwan Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. N.S. Rapri, Advocate for the appellants.

¶10

Rajive Bhalla, J, (Oral)

¶11

The appellants challenge judgments and decrees dated 16.08.1979 and 19.01.1982 passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Hoshiarpur and the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur decreeing the suit filed by the respondent and dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants respectively.

¶12

The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for possession of 5/12 share of the suit land by alleging that before his death on 10.03.1978, Rala son of Hari Chand, the plaintiff's father executed a gift deed in favour of another son Gian Singh. The gift deed was in civil suit No.156 of 1959. The suit was decreed on 20^th April, 1970 by holding that the gift deed was illegal as it was against reversionary rights of the plaintiff. The appeal against this judgment was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur on 4^th December, 1970. It was, therefore, prayed that as Rala had passed away, the suit for possession be decreed in accordance with law.

¶13

The appellant Gian Singh filed a written statement admitting relationship, the gift deed executed by Rala and the fact that the gift deed had been set aside. It was, however, maintained that as he was in

¶14

-2-

¶15

RSA No.272 of 1982

¶16

possession of the property as a coparcener, the suit could not be decreed. After considering the pleadings, the learned trial court framed the following issues:

¶17

Whether the property in suit including the property gifted by Ralla defendant No.1 was coparcenary property of plaintiff Ralla deceased and the defendants? OPP.

¶18

Whether the plaintiff and defendants and Ralla deceased constituted joint Hindu family? OPP.

¶19

Whether the plaintiff has 1/3^rd share in the suit property in his own right as coparcener at the time of death of Ralla? OPP.

¶20

Whether defendant No.1 remained in possession of the property, in dispute with the consent of the plaintiff. If so to what effect? OPD.

¶21

Whether defendant No.1 has made construction of the house in dispute? If so to what extent and to what effect? OPD.

¶22

Whether the house in dispute is the exclusive ownership of defendant No.1? OPD.

¶23

Whether the suit is not within time? OPD.

¶24

Relief.

¶25

On the basis of the pleadings, evidence adduced and the arguments addressed, the trial court decreed the suit for joint possession of 5/12 share. An appeal filed before the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur was dismissed on 19.01.1982.

¶26

Counsel for the appellants fairly concedes that the present appeal which was admitted to await the outcome of a reference made to Full Bench of this Court would have to be dismissed in view of the Full

¶27

-3-

¶28

RSA No.272 of 1982

¶29

Bench judgment in Mihan and another vs. Inder and Another. As the substantial question of law in the present appeal namely the nature and extent of operation of customary law vis-a-vis Hindu Law and the Hindu Succession Act has been answered against the appellants.

¶30

As the decree passed in favour of the respondent holding that the gift deed would not affect the rights of the respondent has been upheld by the courts below and as the ratio of the Full Bench does not affect the operation of the earlier judgment and decree, the present appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶31

12.12.2008 sk

¶32

(Rajive Bhalla) Judge

Gian Singh & Ors. v. Joginder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gian Singh & Ors. v. Joginder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bant Singh Vs Ishar Singh

Punjab State and Ors. Vs Vinod Guliani

Dr. Bal Mukund Shastri Vs Gaur Brahman Vidya Parcharni Sabha & Anr.

Bina Kumari Vs Ircon International Ltd. and Anr.

P.S.E.B. and Ors. Vs Gopi Ram

P.R.T.C. Vs Gian Chand