Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarabjit Kaur And Another vs Dalip Singh And Others on 19 March, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
117 2024:PHHC:039248
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
1. Regular Second Appeal No. 2288 of 2022 (O&M)
Sarabjit Kaur and Another
... Appellant(s)
Versus
Dalip Singh and Others
... Respondent(s)
AND
2. Regular Second Appeal No. 2302 of 2022 (O&M)
Sarabjit Kaur and Another
... Appellant(s)
Versus
Dalip Singh and Others
... Respondent(s)
DATE OF DECISION: 19.03.2024
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate
for the appellant(s).
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
CM-7941-C-2022 IN RSA-2288-2022
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed
and delay of 75 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
CM-7974-C-2022 IN RSA-2302-2022
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed
and delay of 75 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
RSA-2288-2022 And RSA-2302-2022
3. The Regular Second Appeal in the States of Punjab and
2024:PHHC:039248
Regular Second Appeal No. 2288 of 2022 (O&M) AND 2
Regular Second Appeal No. 2302 of 2022 (O&M)
Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh is governed by Section 41 of the
Punjab Courts Act, 1918 and not by Section 100 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, as held by a five Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in
Pankajakshi (Dead) through LRs v. Chandrika and Others (2016) 6 SCC
4. With the consent of the learned counsel representing the
appellants, two connected regular second appeals filed by Sarabjit Kaur and
Gurmit Kaur shall stand disposed of by this common order.
5. Civil Suit No. 49 dated 28.04.2017 was filed by Jarnail Singh
claiming himself to be the adopted son of late Sh.Gurbax Singh. The
appellants herein are claiming the property being purchased from Jarnail
Singh through various intermittent sale deeds.
6. Another Civil Suit No. 47 dated 27.04.2017 was filed by Dalip
Singh for grant of decree of permanent injunction against Jarnail Singh and
others with respect to the same property.
7. In order to comprehend the issue involved in the present case,
the relevant facts, in brief, are required to be narrated. Sh.Gurbax Singh son
of Sh.Harnam Singh was the owner of the property. The name of his wife is
Smt. Jalla Bibi who died on 24.11.2015. Jarnail Singh claimed himself to be
the adopted son of Sh.Gurbax Singh. Whereas defendant No.2 and 3 in the
suit filed by Janail Singh, namely Jarnail Singh, Sarpanch and Sukhchain
Singh claimed the property on the basis of the registered Will executed by
Sh.Gurbax Singh in their favour. The Trial Court decreed the suit filed by
Jarnail Singh, whereas the First Appellate Court has reversed the judgment
and decree passed by the Trial Court in the injunction suit. The Trial Court
2024:PHHC:039248
Regular Second Appeal No. 2288 of 2022 (O&M) AND 3
Regular Second Appeal No. 2302 of 2022 (O&M
dismissed Dalip Singh's suit which has also been reversed by the First
Appellate Court.
8. The First Appellate Court has recorded the following findings
of fact upon re-appreciation of evidence:-
i) Jarnail Singh has failed to prove that there was any
custom in the community to adopt a child beyond the age
of 15 years.
ii) The entire official record proves that Jarnail Singh is the
son of Sh. Munsha Singh and not Sh.Gurbax Singh.
There is no entry in any official record to prove that
Jarnail Singh was ever adopted by Sh.Gurbax Singh.
iii) The deed of adoption is neither signed by the natural
parents of Jarnail Singh nor the adopted parents. No date,
month or year of adoption has come on record.
iv) The registered Will has been proved by examining Jarnail
Singh, Sarpanch who was the attesting witness and
Mehal Singh, Scribe, who appeared as DW.3.
9. Heard the learned counsel representing the appellants at length
and with his able assistance, perused the paper-book.
10. The learned counsel representing the appellants submits that the
registered Will was not produced before the Patwari and the mutation was
sanctioned on the basis of natural succession. He further submits that the
defendants were required to produce the aforesaid Will before the Patwari.
11. This Court has considered the submissions of the learned
2024:PHHC:039248
Regular Second Appeal No. 2288 of 2022 (O&M) AND 4
Regular Second Appeal No. 2302 of 2022 (O&M)
counsel representing the appellants.
12. In this case, the defendants have propounded the registered
Will executed by Sh.Gurbax Singh which has been proved by examining the
attesting witness as well as the Scribe. Jarnail Singh has not proved that
Sh.Gurbax Singh did not execute the registered Will. The photograph of
Sh.Gurbax Singh and others along with the Sub Registrar has been printed
on the aforesaid registered Will. Jarnail Singh does not dispute that the
photograph is of Sh.Gurbax Singh.
13. Moreover, Jarnail Singh has failed to prove that he was ever
adopted by Sh.Gurbax Singh. The learned counsel representing the
appellants does not press any other argument.
14. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground is made out to
interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the First Appellate
Court. Hence, both the appeals are dismissed.
15. The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, in both the
appeals shall stand disposed of.
(Anil Kshetarpal)
Judge
March 19, 2024
"DK"
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
