This is an appeal against dismissal of a suit challenging a sale deed on grounds of drunkenness, lack of legal necessity, and non-ancestral nature. The court held the plaintiff failed to prove the property was ancestral due to insufficient evidence from the Special Kanungo.
The appeal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
vinod kumar 2014.06.09 16:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
RSA No.1175 of 2014 (O&M)
[ 1 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1175 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision:22.05.2014
Bakshish Kaur and others
...Appellants
Versus
Pritam Singh and others
...Respondents
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain
Present: Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate, with Mr. K.S.Multani, Advocate, for the appellants. *****
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J .
This appeal is preferred by the successors-in-interest of the plaintiff who has challenged the sale deed executed by his father on the ground that he was a drunkard and a spendthrift person. The land in dispute is ancestral and the sale effected by him was without any legal necessity.
Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. The basic issue involved in this case is that the land in dispute is held to be ancestral in nature. In this regard, the plaintiff had examined Vijay Kumar, Special Kanungo, to prove the excerpts. However, the said witness has admitted in his cross-examination that he had not gone through the record prior to the year 1943-44 and had also not brought any record in support of his report to connect the property mentioned in Ex.PW3/B with the property in dispute. He had also admitted that he did not mention in his report regarding the comparison of Khasra numbers of the property in dispute. Thus, it has been observed by the lower Appellate Court that
vinod kumar 2014.06.09 16:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
RSA No.1175 of 2014 (O&M) [ 2 ]
excerpts do not prove that the Khasra numbers obtained by Kartar Singh were inherited by him from his father or grandfather.
In view thereof, the plaintiff failed to prove that the property in dispute was ancestral in nature. Once the property in dispute is not found to be ancestral, the suit filed by the plaintiff to challenge the sale deed by his father on the ground that it was without any legal necessity does not survive.
Consequently, I do not find any merit in the present appeal as no question of law much-less substantial is involved therein.
Dismissed.
May 22, 2014 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff proved the disputed land was ancestral.
Whether a sale of non-ancestral property by the father without legal necessity can be challenged by the successors.
Bakshish Kaur and others
Pritam Singh and others
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
