Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 12363 P&H
Judgement Date : 8 August, 2023
103 2023:PHHC:102003
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA-5421-2017(O&M)
Date of Decision: August 08, 2023
SALINDER KAUR @ SURINDER KAUR CHIMA & ANR
........ Appellants
Versus
MOHINDER SINGH & ORS ........ Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Ms. Babita, Advocate for the appellants.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the
judgments and decrees dated 12.02.2014 and 01.09.2016 passed by
the Courts below whereby a suit for declaration claiming half share out
of the estate left by Darshan Singh i.e. the father of the parties, based
on registered Will dated 10.04.1989 besides praying for permanent
injunction as well as joint possession was decreed and the First Appeal
filed at the instance of appellants-defendants was dismissed.
2. Briefly stating, the disputed estate left by deceased Darshan
Singh has become an apple of discord between his legal heirs.
Respondent No.1-plaintiff, relying upon registered Will dated
10.04.1989 executed by the deceased-father, filed the present suit
seeking declaration claiming half share besides praying for permanent
injunction as well as joint possession.
3. On the other hand, the appellants-defendants disputed the
validity of Will dated 10.04.1989 by raising the plea of fraud. The trial
Court TEJWINDER SINGH 2023.08.09 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2023:PHHC:102003
RSA-5421-2017(O&M) -2-
vide judgment and decree dated 12.02.2014 decreed the suit filed by
the respondent No.1-plaintiff, upholding the execution/validity of the
aforementioned will.
4. Aggrieved thereof, the appellants-defendants filed First
Appeal, the same was dismissed by the Court of Ld. Addl. District
Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment and decree dated 01.09.2016.
5. Impugning the aforementioned judgments and decrees
passed by Courts below, learned counsel for the appellants vehemently
submits that original Will was never produced on record besides the
respondent No.1-plaintiff also having failed to appear as a witness to
support his claim in the suit. No other argument has been addressed.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and gone
through the paper-book. I am unable to find substance in the
submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants.
7. The execution of the Will in question dated 10.04.1989 has
been duly proved on record in consonance with Section 63 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925 read with Section 68 of Indian Evidence Act,
1872 through attesting witness PW-4-Sarwan Singh. Though, as a
matter of fact, the original Will has not been produced on record,
however, the certified copy thereof from the office of concerned Sub-
Registrar was produced on record as Ex.P-1 and accepted as valid
evidence by the Courts below. Besides it, in the present facts and
circumstances, the non-appearance of respondent No.1-plaintiff would
not entail adverse inference against him as the appellants-defendants
could not even plead the basic ingredients of 6 Rule 4 of CPC TEJWINDER SINGH 2023.08.09 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2023:PHHC:102003
RSA-5421-2017(O&M) -3-
and thus the non-appearance of respondent No.1-plaintiff as witness
did cause any prejudice to them and thus could be counted fatal to the
claim of respondent No.1-plaintiff.
7. In view of the discussions made hereinabove and finding no
illegality or perversity in the judgments and decrees passed by the
Courts below, the present appeal is dismissed.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
08.08.2023 ( HARKESH MANUJA )
tejwinder JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
TEJWINDER SINGH
2023.08.09 16:56
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!