Dismissed

Bant Singh etc. v. Kirpal Singh etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Aug 2009RSA/1465/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a second appeal regarding a suit for partition and declaration of ownership. The High Court held that the concurrent findings of the courts below on the issue of adverse possession were based on proper evidence and no substantial question of law arose, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed without interfering with the lower courts' decree regarding adverse possession.

Bant Singh etc. Vs Kirpal Singh etc. — Partition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Regular Second Appeal No. 1465 of 2000 Date of Decision : August 18, 2009

¶3

Bant Singh and others

¶4

....Appellants

¶5

Versus

¶6

Kirpal Singh and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

¶9

Present : Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate for the appellants.

¶10

Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 4 to 6.

¶11

T.P.S. MANN, J.

¶12

Suit filed by the appellants against the respondents for declaration and for joint possession, was partly decreed by the learned trial Court on 7.12.1990. The appellants were declared owners in possession to the extent of 3/5^th share in the land measuring 28 bighas 1 biswa situated in village Azimabad. However, the suit for declaration and for joint possession of 1/10^th share in the land measuring 128 bighas 2 biswas situated in village Ibrahimpura was dismissed. Aggrieved of the same, both the parties filed their respective appeals. Vide judgment dated 30.9.1999, the lower appellate Court upheld the decree passed by the learned trial Court and dismissed both the appeals except for modifying the relief of holding the plaintiff entitled to joint possession to the extent of 3/5^th share in the suit land situated in village Azimabad. The plaintiffs are now before

¶13

R.S.A. No. 1465 of 2000 -2-

¶14

this Court in a second appeal preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶15

The short question involved in the appeal pertains to the land measuring 128 bighas 2 biswas situated in village Ibrahimpur in which the plaintiffs-appellants claim to be owners to the extent of 1/10^th share and their prayer for joint possession to that an extent.

¶16

One Bhan Singh was owner to the extent of 1/6^th share in the suit land situated in village Ibrahimpura. On 31.12.1925 aforementioned Bhan Singh executed a writing Ex.DW10/A and gave the above said land to Kalu and Sucha after receiving its value. Ever since the death of Kalu and Sucha, their successors, namely, Gurnam Singh, Baldev Singh and Jaswant Singh came in possession of the land in dispute situated at village Ibrahimpura. Even if writing Ex.DW10/A is not considered to be a sale deed as it was never got registered, yet keeping in view the entries in the jamabandi for the year 1935-36 in which Kalu and Sucha were shown to be in possession of land of Bhan Singh on account of khangi sale, both Kalu and Sucha had become owners of the said piece of land by way of adverse possession.

¶17

For the aforementioned reason, learned Courts below were justified in declining the prayer of the plaintiffs-appellants for being declared as owners of 1/10^th share of the land measuring 128 bighas 2 biswas situated in village Ibrahimpura and for its joint possession.

¶18

R.S.A. No. 1465 of 2000 -3-

¶19

The concurrent findings of facts arrived at by the learned Courts below are based on proper appreciation of the material evidence available on the record. Therefore, they cannot be reversed and, that too, in a second appeal, which is maintainable only on some substantial questions of law and not otherwise. None of the substantial questions of law, as formulated by learned counsel for the appellants and taken on record vide order dated 7.7.2008 in C.M. No. 5055-C of 2008, arises for determination.

¶20

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

¶21

( T.P.S. MANN ) August 18, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1

Bant Singh etc. v. Kirpal Singh etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bant Singh etc. v. Kirpal Singh etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Pb. Vs Smt. Poonam Arora

Chet Ram and Ors. Vs Tulla

Mohinder Singh and Ors. Vs Sarwan Singh and Ors.

Tejinder Singh Vs Chander Kant and Ors.

State of Hy. Vs Sumitra Devi etc.

Rehti Devi and Anr. Vs Parmod Goel and Ors.