Ram Chandra Jaiswal vs Rajesh Jaiswal & Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 1649 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Ram Chandra Jaiswal vs Rajesh Jaiswal & Others on 9 March, 2026

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           S.A. No. 174 of 2025
    Ram Chandra Jaiswal            ...    ...       Plaintiff/Appellant/Appellant
                                   Versus
     Rajesh Jaiswal & Others
                            ... ... Defendants/Respondents/Respondents
                               ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

     For the Appellant             : Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate
                                     Mr. Tejaswa Mohanta, Advocate
     For the Respondents           :
                               ---
    th
08/9 March 2026

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the plaintiff had purchased the suit property from their mother and the defendants had contested the suit by stating that the property was a joint family property and no consideration had passed to the mother. The learned counsel has further submitted that the learned trial court has recorded a finding that the mother of the plaintiff was the true owner of the property. However, while recording the finding with respect to passing of consideration from the plaintiff to the mother, a finding was recorded that the consideration did not pass and consequently the sale was without consideration and ultimately the suit was dismissed.

3. So far as the learned 1st appellate court is concerned, a finding was recorded that the property was a joint family property and with respect to passing of consideration amount, it has been recorded that no document has been filed to suggest before the court that the plaintiff was able to purchase the suit property in the year 2001 after payment of consideration amount and the plaintiff also failed to prove that the mother sold the property in the year 2001 for her treatment as no such document was produced.

4. The learned counsel submits that the learned 1 st appellate court while holding that the suit property was a joint family property has not met with the reasons which have been assigned by the learned trial court

which has held that the property belong to the mother of the plaintiff. He has submitted that the presumption attached in connection with execution of sale deed has also not been taken into consideration. The learned counsel has also submitted that the learned trial court had taken into consideration Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act while coming to the finding, but that aspect of the matter has not been considered by the learned 1st appellate court.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, this appeal is admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law: -

(i) Whether the finding of the learned 1st appellate court holding that the property was a joint family property is perverse on account of non-consideration of the provision of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act?

(ii) Whether the learned courts have failed to properly appreciate the presumption in connection with due execution of registered sale deed and therefore the finding that no consideration was paid to the mother suffer from perversity?

6. Issue notice to the respondents through speed-post, for which requisites be filed within a period of ten days.

7. Let the records be called for from the concerned court.

8. Office to track speed-post-delivery and prepare appropriate office note in connection with service of notice.

9. Post this case on 22nd June 2026 awaiting service report.

10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the concerned court through 'e-mail/FAX'.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 09.03.2026 Mukul/-