RSA 1453 of 2007 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RSA No. 1453 of 2007
Date of Decision: 05.11. 2008
Jagmal ...... Appellant
Versus
Sant Kumar and others ...... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr.Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate
for the appellant.
****
Ajay Tewari, J.
This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree
dated 20.3.2007 passed by the District Judge, Narnaul allowing the appeal
filed by the respondent and consequently decreeing his suit for permanent
injunction restraining the appellant from interfering in the possession of the
property.
The learned lower Appellate Court primarily relied upon the
admission of the appellant to the effect that his father and uncle were
brothers and co-owners, that his uncle died issueless and that after him the
widow of the uncle Smt. Chandro became the owner of the share of the
uncle, and that Smt.Chandro had bequeathed the entire land which she had
RSA 1453 of 2007 2
inherited from his uncle in favour of her nephew Rudha Ram, father of the
respondent. On the basis of this admission the learned lower Appellate
Court held that the commission of the respondent in leading positive
evidence to prove his ownership was not a fatal commission.
In my opinion no fault can be found with the reasoning adopted
by the learned lower Appellate Court. Counsel for the appellant has not
been able to show that even though the agricultural land was transferred to
Rudha Ram yet the share in the house in the property was transferred to
him. Thus it has to be held that Chandro had transferred her entire interest
in the property to Rudha Ram. That being so I hold that the questions
proposed do not arise in this appeal. Consequently the same is dismissed.
No costs.
(AJAY TEWARI)
JUDGE
November 05, 2008
sunita