Dismissed

Satvinder Singh v. Gurinder Kaur

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Dec 2019RSA/2787/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This second appeal challenged the dismissal of a suit for declaration of ownership and permanent injunction. The High Court upheld the lower courts, holding that the appellant miserably failed to prove his adoption or custom-based inheritance to establish status as a Class-I heir, thus invalidating the transfer deed.

What did the court decide?

Suits and decrees below set affirm; appellant's second appeal dismissed.

Satvinder Singh Vs Gurinder Kaur — Succession and Inheritance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

RSA No. 2787 of 2019 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 03. 12. 2019

¶3

Sat vi nder Si ngh

¶4

…. . Appel l ant ver sus

¶5

Gur i nder Kaur and ot her s . . . . . Respondent s

¶6

CORAM: - HON' BLE MRS. JUSTI CE ALKA SARI N Pr esent : Mr . Ranj i t Sai ni , Advocat e f or t he appel l ant

¶7

ALKA SARI N, J. :

¶8

Thi s i s pl ai nt i f f ’ s second appeal agai nst t he j udgment s and decr ees passed by bot h t he Cour t s bel ow.

¶9

Shor n of unnecessar y det ai l s, t he br i ef f act s ar e t hat t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant f i l ed a sui t f or decl ar at i on t o t he ef f ect t hat he i s owner i n possessi on of t he pr oper t y i n quest i on on t he basi s of t r ansf er deed No. 829 r egi st er ed on 11. 07. 2011 and t hat t he r evenue ent r i es showi ng def endant - r espondent No. 3 as owner i n possessi on of t he sui t pr oper t y ar e wr ong and l i abl e t o be cor r ect ed and, f ur t her , f or per manent i nj unct i on r est r ai ni ng def endant - r espondent No. 3, her ser vant s, agent s mukht i ar s , et c. on her behal f f r om al i enat i ng t he sui t pr oper t y on t he basi s of t he wr ong r evenue ent r i es.

¶10

The pedi gr ee t abl e of t he par t i es i s gi ven bel ow: -

¶11

Har nek Si ngh ——— Avt ar Kaur

¶12

I qbal Si ngh ——— Bal wi nder Kaur ( Def endant - r espondent No. 3)

¶13

Gur i nder Kaur Sat vi nder Si ngh Ramandeep Kaur ( Def endant - ( Al l eged adopt ed son/ ( Def endant - r espondent No. 1) Pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant ) r espondent No. 2)

¶14

PARKASH CHAND 2019.12.20 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

RSA- 2787- 2019

¶16

- 2 -

¶17

The case set up by t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant was t hat he i s t he adopt ed son of def endant - r espondent No. 3 and t hat def endant s- r espondent s No. 2 and 3 ar e hi s si st er s. I t was pl eaded t hat hi s adopt ed mot her def endant - r espondent No. 3, vi de t r ansf er deed dat ed 11. 07. 2011, t r ansf er r ed t he sui t l and i n hi s f avour . The sui t was cont est ed by def endant s- r espondent s No. 1 and 2 by f i l i ng wr i t t en st at ement st at i ng t her ei n t hat t he sui t pr oper t y was co- par cenar y pr oper t y, whi ch was owned by t hei r gr andf at her Har nek Si ngh and t hat t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant was not t he adopt ed son of I qbal Si ngh, i . e. , t hei r f at her , but was r at her t he son of one Har phool Si ngh. I t was f ur t her t he case set up i n t he wr i t t en st at ement t hat t he t r ansf er deed was a r esul t of col l usi on bet ween t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant and def endant - r espondent No. 3 t o depr i ve t he def endant s- r espondent s No. 1 and 2 of t he sui t pr oper t y. I n a separ at e wr i t t en st at ement f i l ed by def endant - r espondent No. 3, t he case set up by t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant was admi t t ed.

¶18

The f ol l owi ng i ssues wer e f r amed by t he t r i al

¶19

Cour t : -

¶20

“ I . Whet her t he pl ai nt i f f i s ent i t l ed t o decl ar at i on as pr ayed f or ? OPP

¶21

I I . Whet her t he pl ai nt i f f i s ent i t l ed t o per manent i nj unct i on as pr ayed f or ? OPP

¶22

I I I . Whet her t he pl ai nt i f f has no l ocus st andi or cause of act i on t o f i l e t he sui t ? OPD

¶23

I V. Whet her t he sui t i s not mai nt ai nabl e? OPD V. Whet her t he pl ai nt i f f has conceal ed t r ue and mat er i al f act s f r om t he cour t and has not come t o t he cour t wi t h cl ean hands? OPD

¶24

VI . Rel i ef ”

¶25

PARKASH CHAND 2019.12.20 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶26

RSA- 2787- 2019

¶27

- 3 -

¶28

The t r i al cour t di smi ssed t he sui t of t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant hol di ng t hat t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant f ai l ed t o pr ove hi s adopt i on and, consequent l y, f ai l ed t o pr ove t hat he i s a cl ass- I hei r of def endant - r espondent No. 3. The t r i al Cour t f ur t her hel d t hat t he t r ansf er deed di d not conf er any t i t l e on t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant qua t he sui t pr oper t y.

¶29

Aggr i eved by t he sai d j udgment and decr ee, t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant pr ef er r ed an appeal chal l engi ng t he j udgment and decr ee dat ed 30. 11. 2016 passed by t he t r i al Cour t . The l ower Appel l at e Cour t , by gi vi ng det ai l ed r easons, af f i r med t he j udgment and decr ee passed by t he t r i al Cour t and di smi ssed t he appeal . Hence, t he pr esent r egul ar second appeal .

¶30

I have hear d l ear ned counsel f or t he appel l ant and have al so been t hr ough t he r ecor d wi t h hi s assi st ance.

¶31

I am of t he consi der ed vi ew t hat t he pr esent appeal must f ai l , i nasmuch as, t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant has mi ser abl y f ai l ed t o pr ove t he case set up by hi m. The t r ansf er deed dat ed 11. 07. 2011, Ex. P1, was execut ed on t he basi s of Not i f i cat i on No. SO- 66- C- A- 2/ 1899/ S- 9/ 2001, Ex. P- 2. Vi de t he sai d not i f i cat i on, t he owner of a pr oper t y coul d execut e a t r ansf er deed wi t hout consi der at i on i n f avour of Cl ass- I l egal hei r and was al so exempt ed f r om payi ng t he st amp f ee. Si nce t he t r ansf er deed was execut ed on t he basi s of t he sai d not i f i cat i on, Ex. P2, i t i s f i r st of al l i mper at i ve t o ascer t ai n as t o whet her t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant was a Cl ass- I hei r of def endant - r espondent No. 3. The pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant al l eged t hat he was t he adopt ed son of def endant - r espondent No. 3 and t hat he was adopt ed as per t he pr eval ent cust om. The

¶32

PARKASH CHAND 2019.12.20 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶33

RSA- 2787- 2019

¶34

- 4 -

¶35

pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant mi ser abl y f ai l ed t o pr ove hi s adopt i on, i nasmuch as, nei t her any adopt i on deed was pr oduced nor was t her e an i ot a of evi dence pr oduced on r ecor d t o show t hat t her e was any gi vi ng and t aki ng cer emony qua t he adopt i on. I n f act , t he case set up was t hat t he adopt i on was as per t he pr eval ent cust om, but no such cust om was ever pl eaded or pr oved. I t i s t r i t e t hat he, who r el i es on a cust om, has t o pl ead and pr ove t he same. Bot h t he Cour t s bel ow have r i ght l y come t o t he concl usi on t hat once t he pl ai nt i f f - appel l ant f ai l ed t o pr ove hi s adopt i on t he t r ansf er deed woul d not conf er any t i t l e upon hi m qua t he sui t pr oper t y si nce he f ai l ed t o pr ove hi msel f as a Cl ass- I hei r of def endant - r espondent No. 3.

¶36

No ot her ar gument has been r ai sed by l ear ned counsel f or t he appel l ant . No quest i on of l aw much l ess subst ant i al quest i on of l aw ar i ses i n t he pr esent case.

¶37

I n vi ew of t he above, I do not f i nd any mer i t i n t he pr esent appeal . The j udgment s and decr ees of t he Cour t s bel ow st and af f i r med and t he appeal i s di smi ssed.

¶38

( ALKA SARI N) JUDGE

¶39

03. 12. 2019

¶40

par kash

¶41

NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO

¶42

PARKASH CHAND 2019.12.20 18:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Satvinder Singh v. Gurinder Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satvinder Singh v. Gurinder Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurinderbir Singh Vs Amarjit Singh and Others

Mohan Chaudhary & Anr. Vs Bijender & Ors.

Rajwinder Kaur through Spa Kinny Singh Vs Sandeep Singh

Pal Singh (Deceased) through His Legal Representative Vs Manju and Others

Angoori Devi and Ors. Vs Sukhdev Singh and Ors.

Balbir Kaur and Ors. Vs Narinder Singh and Ors.