{"id":225614,"date":"2009-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009"},"modified":"2017-08-26T23:42:17","modified_gmt":"2017-08-26T18:12:17","slug":"barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009<\/div>\n
R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                         1\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n                       R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)\n                       Date of decision: 15.7.2009\n\n\nBarphy Devi @ Bharpo                                    ......Appellant\n\n                       Versus\n\n\nMahabir Singh and others                           .......Respondents\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA\n\nPresent:   Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate,\n           for the appellant.\n                 ****\n\nSABINA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
           Plaintiff Barphy @ Barpho filed a suit for declaration to<\/p>\n
the effect that she was owner in possession of the suit land to the<\/p>\n
extent of 1\/3rd share. The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the<\/p>\n
Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.) Jind vide judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
7.12.2004. In appeal, the said judgment and decree were upheld by<\/p>\n
the Additional District Judge, Jind vide judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
11.12.2006. Hence, the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n
           Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the lower appellate<\/p>\n
Court in para Nos. 2 and 3 of its judgment, are as under:-<\/p>\n
           “2.         The facts, in brief, of the case of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
           as set up in the plaint before the learned lower court are<\/p>\n
           that plaintiff is co-owner in possession of the land<\/p>\n
           comprised in    Khewat No.104\/96 Khatoni No. 143\/139
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
          measuring 36 kanals to the extent of 1\/3 rd share situated<\/p>\n
          in the revenue estate of Jind. Plaintiff’s husband Jaswant<\/p>\n
          Singh along with defendant No.1 Dharam Singh and Om<\/p>\n
          Parkash (since deceased) were real brothers and they<\/p>\n
          were living in separate houses for the last more than 30<\/p>\n
          years   having    separate    kitchens    and   they    never<\/p>\n
          constituted a joint Hindu family. The plaintiff is an old<\/p>\n
          lady of 75 years of age and is an illiterate and rustic<\/p>\n
          house hold lady and she does not know the norms of the<\/p>\n
          law and the court but defendant No.1 and his brother Om<\/p>\n
          Parkash (since deceased) were very clever persons and<\/p>\n
          they brought the plaintiff in the court for taking the land on<\/p>\n
          lease for two years but they by playing fraud and mis-<\/p>\n
          representation upon her got the civil court decree passed<\/p>\n
          in their favour though the plaintiff never appeared before<\/p>\n
          the court for giving the statement. Even the plaintiff never<\/p>\n
          remained with the defendants as family member, so there<\/p>\n
          is no question of acting as family settlement between<\/p>\n
          them and the defendants had not paid any money or any<\/p>\n
          property in lieu of her share out of the suit land at the time<\/p>\n
          impugned decree.      The property involved in this case<\/p>\n
          under the decree was more than Rs.100\/- so without<\/p>\n
          registration on the     basis of civil Court decree the<\/p>\n
          defendants cannot be considered as owners and rather
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                        3<\/span><\/p>\n
          without registration it has not passed any title right in<\/p>\n
          favour of the defendants qua the suit land. So, decree<\/p>\n
          dated 4.11.1987 passed in favour of the defendants qua<\/p>\n
          the suit land is illegal, void and the same is not binding<\/p>\n
          upon the plaintiff. Plaintiff came to know about the decree<\/p>\n
          in the month of October, 1998 when she came to revenue<\/p>\n
          Patwari for taking fard jamabandi that suit land has<\/p>\n
          already been transferred in favour of the defendants and<\/p>\n
          mutation in this respect has already been sanctioned.<\/p>\n
          So, after taking copy of the decree and other documents<\/p>\n
          she filed the suit and challenged the decree dated<\/p>\n
          4.11.1987 for setting aside the same by declaring as<\/p>\n
          illegal and void.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          3.          The defendants have contested the suit by<\/p>\n
          filing their joint written statement. Their stand is that the<\/p>\n
          plaintiff is neither took place with the plaintiff in which<\/p>\n
          answering defendants got the suit land while they gave<\/p>\n
          property situated in Sampla to the plaintiff and plaintiff<\/p>\n
          herself appeared in the court by engaging a counsel and<\/p>\n
          on the statement of the plaintiff the decree was passed<\/p>\n
          and the defendants never played any fraud or mis-<\/p>\n
          representation upon her.     Members of the joint Hindu<\/p>\n
          family the defendants were having preexisting rights in<\/p>\n
          the suit land. So, the decree under challenge does not
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                          4<\/span><\/p>\n
            require any registration and by virtue of the same the<\/p>\n
            defendants are to be considered owners in possession of<\/p>\n
            the suit land. Even the suit of the plaintiff is time barred<\/p>\n
            but the plaintiff has filed the suit after 11 years of the<\/p>\n
            passing of the decree. She is not in possession of the<\/p>\n
            suit land and she has filed the suit for declaration without<\/p>\n
            seeking the relief of possession, so her suit is         not<\/p>\n
            maintainable and she is also estopped from filing the suit<\/p>\n
            by her own act and conduct. In this way the defendants<\/p>\n
            have controverted the stand of the plaintiff and also<\/p>\n
            requested for dismissal of the suit.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were<\/p>\n
framed by the trial Court:-\n<\/p>\n
            “1.        Whether the plaintiff is owner in possession of<\/p>\n
            the suit land to the extent of 1\/3rd share? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            2.         Whether the judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
            4.11.1987 passed in civil suit No.187 dated 7.3.1987<\/p>\n
            passed by the then ld. Senior Sub Judge, Jind in a suit<\/p>\n
            titled as Dharam Singh vs. Barfi Devi etc. and mutation<\/p>\n
            No.5440 dated 30.6.1997 are illegal, null and void and<\/p>\n
            does not effect the rights of the plaintiff and are liable to<\/p>\n
            be set aside? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            3.         Whether the plaintiff is entitled for injunction<\/p>\n
            as prayed for? OPP
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                        5<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           4.         Whether the suit is time barred? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           5.         Whether the suit is false and frivolous and<\/p>\n
           liable to be dismissed with special costs.? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           6.         Whether the plaintiff is estopped by her own<\/p>\n
           act and conduct from filing the present suit? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           7.         Relief. “<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of<\/p>\n
the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.<\/p>\n
           Dharam Singh-defendant No.1, Om Parkash and Jaswant<\/p>\n
Singh (all are since deceased) were real brothers. Plaintiff is widow<\/p>\n
of deceased Jaswant Singh. Case of the plaintiff was that Dharam<\/p>\n
Singh and Om Parkash by playing a fraud upon her had obtained her<\/p>\n
thumb impressions on blank papers without telling her the true facts<\/p>\n
and had got the suit land transferred in their favour fraudulently<\/p>\n
through Civil Court decree dated 4.11.1987 passed in civil suit<\/p>\n
No.187 of 7.3.1987 titled Dharam Singh etc. vs. Barfi @ Barfo etc.<\/p>\n
           Admittedly, Jaswant Singh, Dharam Singh and Om<\/p>\n
Parkash had purchased land and out of which, plaintiff had 1\/3rd<\/p>\n
share. In order to prove that a fraud had been played upon her at the<\/p>\n
time of suffering of the civil Court decree by her, plaintiff herself<\/p>\n
appeared in the witness box as PW-1.        Her case was that she<\/p>\n
wanted to give her land on lease to the defendants for cultivation for<\/p>\n
two years but her thumb impressions had been taken on some blank<\/p>\n
papers and on the basis of the same, a decree had been got passed
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                          6<\/span><\/p>\n
by them against her. The defendants, on the other hand, placed on<\/p>\n
record a copy of the plaint in the earlier suit Ex.D-1. As per the same<\/p>\n
in a family settlement, property situated in Garhi Sampla was given to<\/p>\n
the plaintiff while the suit land had come to their share.      Plaintiff<\/p>\n
appeared in the said suit along with her counsel. The certified copy<\/p>\n
of the written statement filed by the plaintiff in the said suit was<\/p>\n
placed on record as Ex.D-4, wherein the plaintiff had admitted the<\/p>\n
claim of Dharam Singh and Om Parkash.         Statement of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
was recorded in the Court before passing of the impugned decree.<\/p>\n
The only ground available to the plaintiff to challenge the decree was<\/p>\n
that it was a result of fraud. Learned counsel for the appellant has<\/p>\n
failed to point out anything from the record that the plaintiff had not<\/p>\n
appeared before the Court in the earlier suit or had not filed any<\/p>\n
written statement.\n<\/p>\n
           The case of the defendants in the earlier suit was that in a<\/p>\n
family settlement the property situated in Garhi Sampla was given to<\/p>\n
the plaintiff. It has been noticed by the learned Additional District<\/p>\n
Judge that the plaintiff herself had stated that residential house and<\/p>\n
some other property in Sampla were in her possession.           Hence,<\/p>\n
learned   Additional District Judge has rightly observed that the<\/p>\n
possibility of a family settlement having been effected between the<\/p>\n
parties, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, could not<\/p>\n
be ruled out. In the facts of the present case, the Courts below rightly<\/p>\n
held that there was no question of any misrepresentation of fraud
\n R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M)                          7<\/span><\/p>\n
having been committed by the defendants upon the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
           The plaintiff had challenged the impugned judgments and<\/p>\n
decrees   of the Courts below on the basis of fraud                 and<\/p>\n
misrepresentation but had failed to establish the same.<\/p>\n
           The judgment and decree in question were passed on<\/p>\n
4.11.1987, whereas, plaintiff filed the suit in the year 1998 after more<\/p>\n
than eleven years.\n<\/p>\n
           In these circumstances, the Courts below had rightly<\/p>\n
dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.   I do not find any illegality or<\/p>\n
irregularity in the impugned judgments which may give rise to any<\/p>\n
substantial question of law for consideration of this Court in second<\/p>\n
appeal.\n<\/p>\n
           Accordingly, the present appeal stands dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                               (SABINA)
\n                                                JUDGE
\nJuly 15, 2009
\nanita\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No. 414 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.7.2009 Barphy Devi @ Bharpo ……Appellant Versus Mahabir Singh and others …….Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-225614","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBarphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1491,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009"},"wordCount":1491,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009","name":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-26T18:12:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/barphy-devi-bharpo-vs-mahabir-singh-and-others-on-15-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Barphy Devi @ Bharpo vs Mahabir Singh And Others on 15 July, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225614","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=225614"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225614\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=225614"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=225614"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=225614"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}