Single Judge dismissed the appeal filed against a lower court decree setting aside a property sale. The Court held that confusion in later jamabandi records did not rebut evidence proving the seller was deceased, rendering the power of attorney invalid.
The appeal was dismissed, maintaining the decree below setting aside the sale deed.
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.
-1-
RSA-3410-2016 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
105 RSA-3410-2016 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.07.2018
Swaran Singh
...... Appellant
Versus
Jagdish Singh and others ...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr.Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the appellant(s).
AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral)
This appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgment of the Courts below decreeing the suit filed by the respondents.
The case of the respondents was that the property was originally owned by Gurdit Singh. In the year 1943, Inder Singh alias Karam Singh and Chanan Singh bought the property in dispute. The mutation was sanctioned in favour of two purchasers. Thereafter in two jamabandis same names were reflected. However, in the third jamabandi by mistake name of Kharak Singh was also incorporated as a part owner and it was further shown that three owners were sons of Gurdit Singh. In the year 1987, the appellant is stated to have purchased the 2/3rd share in the property of share of Inder Singh and Kharak Singh. Kharak Singh is stated to have sold the property on the basis of power of attorney executed by Inder Singh in the year 1987. The case of the respondents was that in fact Inder Singh had died in the year 1978 and it was in these circumstances they filed the suit for declaration that they continued to be owners of the land and for setting aside the sale deeds. Both the Courts AMIT KAUNDAL below decreed the suit because the appellant did not explain how the 2018.08.03 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
-2-
RSA-3410-2016 (O&M)
change occurred in the fourth jamabandi after the purchase made in the year 1943. The Courts below has also held that once Inder Singh alias Karam Singh died in the year 1978, he could not have executed the power of attorney in the year 1987 and that is why the appellant is in appeal before this Court.
Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant is a bona fide purchaser because he saw that for many years the revenue record contained the name of Kharak Singh as one of the owners. As regards the death certificate, learned counsel for the appellant states that the death certificate is in the name of Karam Singh alias Bhola and not in the name of Inder Singh. Consequently, the appellant was not able to prove that in fact the Inder Singh had died in the year 1978.
In my opinion, the argument must fail. The appellant has to explain how and in what circumstances the name of Kharak Singh appeared after three jamabandis without any mutation and without fard badar. Moreover even if the death certificate contained the name of the deceased as Karam Singh alias Bhola instead of Karam Singh alias Inder Singh but the paternity was correct, a presumption had arisen that the death certificate pertained to Karam Singh and the Courts below rightly held that the appellant was not able to rebut the evidence.
In the circumstances, no ground is made out to allow the
appeal.
Dismissed.
| ( AJAY | TEWARI ) | |
|---|---|---|
| July 27, 2018 | JU | DGE |
| A.Kaundal | ||
| Whether speaking/reasoned | - Yes/No |
|
| Whether reportable | - Yes/No |
AMIT KAUNDAL 2018.08.03 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal was allowed given the mutation history and paternity evidence regarding the deceased purchaser.
Whether the erroneous inclusion of a name in later revenue records defeated the presumption of death establishing by earlier evidence.
Swaran Singh
Jagdish Singh
Ajay Tewari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
