High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sarabjit Kaur vs Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal And Another on 27 January, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarabjit Kaur vs Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal And Another on 27 January, 2009
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                          CHANDIGARH

                                  Civil Revision No.427 of 2009 (O&M)
                                  Date of decision:27.01.2009

Sarabjit Kaur                                            .............. Petitioner
                                      Vs.

Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal and another                        .............Respondents

Present:   Ms. Anita Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate
           for the petitioner.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

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 ?
                             -.-
K.KANNAN, J. (ORAL)

1. The petition filed for seeking DNA test of the plaintiff and the

two daughters of the defendant was dismissed by the Court below and the

applicant before the trial Court is revision petitioner before this Court.

2. The suit had been filed for recovery of possession of the property

by the plaintiff from the hands of the defendant where the defendant has

raised the contention that she had been kept as mistress of the plaintiff and

the house itself had been purchased, by way of gift, for her benefit and for

the benefit of children that were born through the plaintiff. The proof of

birth of the children that may have been born to the defendant is alien to the

scope of suit that is filed for recovery of possession on the basis of title. The

evidence which the defendant was trying to secure would also be equally

irrelevant for the issue relating to title to immoveable property or entitlement

of the plaintiff to secure possession. The dismissal accords with what is

legally appropriate and calls for no intervention in revision petition.

3. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed.

(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE
January 27, 2009
Pankaj*