{"id":47101,"date":"2008-12-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008"},"modified":"2019-01-29T17:10:23","modified_gmt":"2019-01-29T11:40:23","slug":"rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008<\/div>\n
R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                  -1-\n\n\n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                   AT CHANDIGARH\n                         ****\n                                       R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007\n                                       Date of Decision:16.12.2008\n\nRajinder Singh and others\n                                                        .....Appellants\n            Vs.\n\nRam Avtar alias Hem Chand and others\n                                                        .....Respondents\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL\n\nPresent:-   Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the appellants.\n\n            Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 8.\n                         ****\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
HARBANS LAL, J.\n<\/p>\n
            This appeal is directed against the judgment\/ decree dated<\/p>\n
7.3.2007 passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Gurgaon, whereby<\/p>\n
he dismissed the appeal preferred against the judgment\/ decree dated<\/p>\n
20.9.2006 vide which the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division),<\/p>\n
Gurgaon decreed the suit for sanctioning the mutation in favour of the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs in terms of judgment and decree dated 10.3.1980 passed in case<\/p>\n
titled as Ram Avtar and others v. Shiv Lal in Civil Suit No.460 of 1.9.1978<\/p>\n
and for recording the names of the plaintiffs as co-sharers to the extent of<\/p>\n
one-third share in the land comprised in Rectangle No.82, Killa Nos.11 (3<\/p>\n
kanal 2 marlas), 19 (5 kanal 13 marlas) 22 (8 kanal 0 marla) and 45\/312<\/p>\n
share in the land comprised in Rectangle No.82, Killa No.20\/1 (7 kanal 12<\/p>\n
marlas), 21 kanal (8 kanal 0 marla) situated in the revenue estate of Village<\/p>\n
Sidhrawali, Tehsil and District Gurgaon.\n<\/p>\n
 R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                    -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
             The facts which form the backdrop of the suit are that the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs are the owners and in possession of the suit land to the extent of<\/p>\n
one-third share vide decree dated 10.3.1980 passed in civil suit bearing<\/p>\n
caption Ram Avtar and others v. Shiv Lal. The appeal preferred there-<\/p>\n
against by the defendants was also dismissed vide judgment dated<\/p>\n
9.10.1980. The aforesaid decree was executed and mutation No.744 was<\/p>\n
entered in favour of the plaintiffs. The defendants in collusion with revenue<\/p>\n
officials, illegally got cancelled the said mutation.       The entries being<\/p>\n
erroneous in the revenue record and against the order of the Civil Court<\/p>\n
were liable to be set aside and the same were required to be corrected in<\/p>\n
favour of the plaintiffs. The defendants have no right to take an undue<\/p>\n
advantage of such wrong entries. They are threatening to dispossess the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs and to alienate the suit land. On these allegations, the suit has<\/p>\n
been filed for declaration to the effect that the plaintiffs are owners in<\/p>\n
possession to the extent of one-third share in agricultural land, comprised in<\/p>\n
Khewat No.176\/194, Rectangle No.82, Killa No.11 (3 kanal 2 marlas), 19 (5<\/p>\n
kanal 13 marlas), 22 (8 kanal 0 marla), 45\/312 share in Rectangle No.82,<\/p>\n
Killa No.20\/1 (7 kanal 12 marlas), 22 (8 kanal 0 marla) total measuring 32<\/p>\n
kanal 7 marlas situated in the revenue estate of aforesaid Village and that<\/p>\n
the revenue entries showing defendants to be in possession of disputed<\/p>\n
property are wrong and illegal, with consequential relief of perpetual<\/p>\n
injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the possession of<\/p>\n
the plaintiffs over the suit land apart from alienating the same.<\/p>\n
             In answer to this claim, the defendants in their joint written<\/p>\n
statement, have inter-alia pleaded that the suit is not maintainable and is<\/p>\n
barred by limitation. It has been denied that the plaintiffs are the owners in
\n R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                   -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
possession of the disputed property, rather the answering defendants are the<\/p>\n
absolute owners in peaceful possession of the same. It is further denied that<\/p>\n
the plaintiffs have become the owners in possession of the disputed property<\/p>\n
through the alleged judgment and decree. As alleged, the mutation No.744<\/p>\n
has been rightly cancelled.\n<\/p>\n
            The following issues were framed by the learned trial Court:-<\/p>\n
            1.     Whether plaintiffs are owners in possession of the suit<\/p>\n
                   land described in para no.1 of the plaint? OPP<\/p>\n
            2.     Whether the entries in the revenue record of the suit land<\/p>\n
                   are wrong, illegal, void and liable to be set aside? OPP<\/p>\n
            3.     Whether plaintiffs are entitled to claim as prayed ? OPP<\/p>\n
            4.     Whether suit of the plaintiffs is not maintainable in the<\/p>\n
                   present form? OPD<\/p>\n
            5.     Whether suit of the plaintiff is barred by their own act,<\/p>\n
                   conduct, acquiescence and latches? OPD<\/p>\n
            6.     Whether suit of the plaintiff is time barred? OPD<\/p>\n
            7.     Whether suit is not property valued for the purpose of<\/p>\n
                   court fee and jurisdiction? OPD<\/p>\n
            8.     Relief.\n<\/p>\n
            After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining<\/p>\n
the evidence on record, the learned trial Court decreed the suit as noticed at<\/p>\n
the outset. Feeling aggrieved therewith, the defendants went up in appeal,<\/p>\n
which was dismissed by the First Appellate Court. Being undaunted and<\/p>\n
dissatisfied therewith, the defendants have preferred this appeal.<\/p>\n
            I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides<\/p>\n
perusing the record as well as the findings returned by both the Courts
\n R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                   -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
below with due care and circumspection.\n<\/p>\n
               Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate on behalf of the appellants<\/p>\n
urged with great eloquence that a combined reading of Ex.P.4, the certified<\/p>\n
copy of the judgment delivered by the Court of learned Additional District<\/p>\n
Judge, Gurgaon as well as Ex.P.10 Mutation No.744 would reveal that this<\/p>\n
mutation is discordant with the operative part of Ex.P.4 and it is because of<\/p>\n
this reason that it has been cancelled. He further puts that this mutation<\/p>\n
being in teeth with E.P.4, both the Courts below have gravely erred in<\/p>\n
decreeing the suit.\n<\/p>\n
               To tide over these submissions, Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate<\/p>\n
representing the respondents maintained that if it is assumed that Ex.P.10 is<\/p>\n
not in consonance with Ex.P.4, the remedy open to the defendants was to<\/p>\n
approach the concerned authorities for necessary correction. Ex.P.10 has<\/p>\n
been got cancelled at the back of the plaintiffs and that being so, no fault<\/p>\n
can be found with the findings returned by both the Courts below.<\/p>\n
               I have given a deep and thoughtful consideration to the rival<\/p>\n
contentions.\n<\/p>\n
               The substantial question of law which arises for determination<\/p>\n
is “as to whether a suit for simpliciter declaration is maintainable?” There<\/p>\n
is no dispute with the proposition of law that a simpliciter suit for<\/p>\n
declaration without seeking relief of possession is not maintainable. But<\/p>\n
here in this case, the facts are distinguishable. Vide Ex.P.2, the certified<\/p>\n
copy of the judgment dated 10.3.1980 delivered by the Court of learned Sub<\/p>\n
Judge Ist Class, Gurgaon, Ram Avtar alias Hem Chand, Kanwar Lal, Parbhu<\/p>\n
sons, Chandro daughter and Sarti widow of Hira Lal son of Nain Sukh were<\/p>\n
granted a decree for joint possession to the extent of one-third share in the
\n R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                      -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
disputed land. The appeal was preferred against this judgment. The learned<\/p>\n
Additional District Judge, Gurgaon vide his judgment\/ decree dated<\/p>\n
9.10.1980 Ex.P.4 held as under:-\n<\/p>\n
             “For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the<\/p>\n
             appeal. However, there is merit in the cross-objections. The<\/p>\n
             decree dated 10.3.1980 under appeal passed by learned trial<\/p>\n
             Judge, is hereby set aside. A decree for joint possession to the<\/p>\n
             extent of 1\/3rd share in the land comprising in Rect. No.82,<\/p>\n
             Killa Nos.11(3-2), 19(5-13), 22(8-0) and 45\/312 share in the<\/p>\n
             land comprising in Rect. No.82, Killa No.20\/1 (7-12), 21(8-0),<\/p>\n
             situated in the revenue estate of village Sidhrawali, Tehsil and<\/p>\n
             District Gurgaon, is hereby passed in favour of the plaintiff-<\/p>\n
             respondents against the defendant.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             The mutation Ex.P.10 was sanctioned on the basis of this<\/p>\n
decree. When the defendants started threatening to dispossess the plaintiffs<\/p>\n
and to alienate the land in dispute, the latter filed the present suit. Thus, this<\/p>\n
suit is maintainable as the plaintiffs being in possession were not required to<\/p>\n
seek the consequential relief of possession. So, the substantial question of<\/p>\n
law is determined accordingly. A glance through Ex.P.10 would reveal that<\/p>\n
no reason worth the name has been assigned with regards to the cancellation<\/p>\n
of this mutation. To add further to it, as would be apparent from the record,<\/p>\n
this mutation was cancelled without affording an opportunity of being heard<\/p>\n
to the plaintiffs. Even the doctrine of `Audi Alteram Partem’ contemplates<\/p>\n
that no one should be condemned unheard. If the correction is to be made in<\/p>\n
the entries existing in the revenue record, the concerned revenue authority is<\/p>\n
required to notify such change to the party to be effected thereby. In the
\n R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007                                  -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
instant case, the plaintiffs- respondents have been condemned unheard. The<\/p>\n
order cancelling this mutation is non-reasoned and laconic. Sequelly, the<\/p>\n
findings returned by both the Courts below warrant no interference. The<\/p>\n
plaintiffs- respondents are entitled to get the land as mentioned in the<\/p>\n
operative part of Ex.P.4 mutated in their names in the revenue record.<\/p>\n
            As a sequel of the above discussion, this appeal being devoid of<\/p>\n
any merit is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
December 16, 2008                                 ( HARBANS LAL )\nrenu                                                   JUDGE\n\nWhether to be referred to the Reporter? No.\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008 R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** R.S.A. No.2902 of 2007 Date of Decision:16.12.2008 Rajinder Singh and others …..Appellants Vs. Ram Avtar alias Hem Chand and others […]<\/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-47101","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - 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\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-29T11:40:23+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-29T11:40:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1386,\"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\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-29T11:40:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - 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\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-29T11:40:23+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-29T11:40:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008"},"wordCount":1386,"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\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008","name":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And ... on 16 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-29T11:40:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-singh-and-others-vs-ram-avtar-alias-hem-chand-and-on-16-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajinder Singh And Others vs Ram Avtar Alias Hem Chand And … on 16 December, 2008"}]},{"@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\/47101","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=47101"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47101\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47101"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=47101"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=47101"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}