This second appeal was dismissed. The appellant failed to establish the existence of an ancestral nucleus or that the sale benefited the family. The courts below correctly rejected the plaintiffs' case due to lack of evidence.
The second appeal is 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.2505 of 2015 (O&M) Date of Decision.28.09.2015
Kamal Phool and others
.......Appellants
Versus
Mam Chand
......Respondent
Present: Mr. S.S. Dinarpur, Advocate for the appellant.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
September 28, 2015 Pankaj*
PANKAJ KUMAR 2015.09.29 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Kamal Phool and others
Mam Chand
K. KANNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
