{"id":63693,"date":"2009-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009"},"modified":"2017-09-25T07:13:48","modified_gmt":"2017-09-25T01:43:48","slug":"satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009<\/div>\n
R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                    1\n\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n                        R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)\n                        Date of decision: 23.10.2009\n\nSatbir Singh\n\n                                                      ......Appellant\n                        Versus\n\n\n\nJagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh\n                                                   .......Respondent\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA\n\nPresent:   Mr.Shailendra Jain, Advocate,\n           for the appellant.\n\n                 ****\n\nSABINA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
           Plaintiff Jugbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh filed a suit for<\/p>\n
permanent injunction which was decreed by the Additional Civil<\/p>\n
Judge (Sr.Divn.), Gurgaon vide judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
24.9.2007. In appeal, filed by defendant, the said judgment and<\/p>\n
decree were upheld by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon vide<\/p>\n
judgment and decree dated 31.3.2008. Hence, the present appeal<\/p>\n
by the defendant.\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 plaintiff was absolute owner in possession<\/p>\n
           of land shown in yellow and red colours marked by letters
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                   2<\/span><\/p>\n
          BEFG in the site plan attached with the plaint, part and<\/p>\n
          parcel of Khasra No.7289\/2923\/3 of Mauza, Gurgaon,<\/p>\n
          Tehsil and District Gurgaon, now part of Laxman Vihar,<\/p>\n
          Gurgaon, bounded as under:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          East:      Land of other persons\n\n          West:      25ft. Rasta out of the land of the plaintiffs\n<\/pre>\n
                     bearing Khasra No.7289\/2923\/3 and then land
\n                     of other persons.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          North:     Land of defendant bearing khasra No.7289\/
\n                     2923\/2 and thereafter land of Baljeet Singh
\n                     forming part of khasra No.7289\/2922\/2.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          South:     Land of other persons.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     The plaintiff had sold some of his land after<\/p>\n
          providing private rasta of 18′ wide as shown in the site<\/p>\n
          plan and retained 12′ wide strip of land shown in red<\/p>\n
          colour marked by letters ABCD towards the North of the<\/p>\n
          said rasta of 18 in order to sell the same after carbing out<\/p>\n
          plots therefrom for the purposes of shops having depth<\/p>\n
          12′. the land shown in yellow and red colours in the site<\/p>\n
          plan was received by the plaintiff in mutual arrangement<\/p>\n
          of partition effected on 1.10.1995 followed by a decree<\/p>\n
          dated 4.12.1995 passed by the Court of Shri R.K.Sharma,<\/p>\n
          the then learned Additional Senior Sub Judge, Gurgaon in<\/p>\n
          suit No.1267 of 1995.     The said partition was effected<\/p>\n
          between the parties to the suit and another brother Baljit<\/p>\n
          Singh. The said partition was subsequently recorded in<\/p>\n
          the revenue record vide mutation No.18408 sanctioned
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
          on 20.3.1996. The defendant is the real brother of the<\/p>\n
          plaintiff but the defendant was a forceful person and had<\/p>\n
          no respect for law. The defendant wanted to grab the red<\/p>\n
          coloured portion shown by letters ABCD in the site plan<\/p>\n
          and wanted to include the same in his own land falling<\/p>\n
          towards its North. The defendant was well aware that the<\/p>\n
          red coloured portion was part and parcel of Khasra<\/p>\n
          No.7289\/2923\/3 and was possessed by the plaintiff. The<\/p>\n
          defendant even wanted to alienate the said land. With<\/p>\n
          these allegations, the plaintiff sought a decree for<\/p>\n
          declaration that he was absolute owner in possession of<\/p>\n
          land shown in yellow and red colour in the site plan and<\/p>\n
          the defendant had no concerned with the same and<\/p>\n
          further sought a decree for permanent injunction for<\/p>\n
          restraining the defendant from encroaching upon the red<\/p>\n
          coloured portion shown by letters ABCD in the site plan<\/p>\n
          and from alienating the same and from raising any sort of<\/p>\n
          construction on the said land.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          3.         The defendant contested the suit and filed<\/p>\n
          written statement in which preliminary objections were<\/p>\n
          raised that the plaintiff had concealed the material facts<\/p>\n
          from the Court, that the plaintiff was estopped by his own<\/p>\n
          act and conduct from filing the present suit, that the suit<\/p>\n
          was not maintainable, that the plaintiff had no cause of
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
          action, that the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the suit,<\/p>\n
          that the suit was bad for non-joinder of Smt.Pushpa<\/p>\n
          Rathor other vendees as necessary parties, that the suit<\/p>\n
          was not properly valued for the purposes of court fee and<\/p>\n
          jurisdiction. It was further pleaded that the plaintff, the<\/p>\n
          defendant and their third brother Baljit Singh were joint<\/p>\n
          owners of Khasra No.2922 and 2923 and various other<\/p>\n
          properties, which were partitioned amongst them by a<\/p>\n
          family settlement and compromise, which was duly<\/p>\n
          acknowledged vide decree dated 4.12.1985 wherein the<\/p>\n
          defendant was allotted area measuring 289 \u00bc x 84′ out of<\/p>\n
          khasra No.2923 as shown in the compromise as well as<\/p>\n
          in the site plan attached with the compromise dated<\/p>\n
          29.11.1995, which was part of judgment and decree<\/p>\n
          dated 4.12.1995. It was further pleaded that the plaintiff<\/p>\n
          was allotted similar area out of Khasra No.2923 and their<\/p>\n
          third brother was allotted area of Khasra No.2922 and<\/p>\n
          since then the defendant was exclusive owner in<\/p>\n
          possession of the portion so allotted to him out of Khasra<\/p>\n
          No.2923 and the defendant had also sold some portion<\/p>\n
          out of his own share of land and several houses were in<\/p>\n
          existence constructed by vendees of the defendant.            It<\/p>\n
          was further pleaded by the defendant had he had never<\/p>\n
          sold any portion of the plaintiff, rather the plaintiff had sold
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                     5<\/span><\/p>\n
          various plots to various persons out of the area allotted to<\/p>\n
          him and he had constructed a pukhta road touching the<\/p>\n
          land allotted to the defendant and several houses were in<\/p>\n
          existence belonging to the vendees of the plaintiff and the<\/p>\n
          doors of the said houses opened and road constructed by<\/p>\n
          the plaintiff.    It was alleged that the plaintiff had<\/p>\n
          constructed the road in his own portion to give rasta for<\/p>\n
          his vendees and the site plan given by the plaintiff did not<\/p>\n
          depict   the     actual   state   of   affairs   and   wrong<\/p>\n
          measurements had been given in the same.               It was<\/p>\n
          further alleged that a rasta was carved out towards the<\/p>\n
          west of the land allotted to the plaintiff, the defendant and<\/p>\n
          their brother Baljit Singh, which was still in existence. It<\/p>\n
          was further pleaded by the defendant that 18′ wide road<\/p>\n
          still existed in the portion allotted to the plaintiff vide<\/p>\n
          judgment and decree dated 4.12.1995 and the same was<\/p>\n
          left by him to give passage to his vendees and the said<\/p>\n
          road has become public property and the vendees of the<\/p>\n
          plaintiff as well as the defendant and the villagers at large<\/p>\n
          were using the said road to approach their respective<\/p>\n
          properties and houses and as such the plaintiff was not<\/p>\n
          the owner of the road as there was no land of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
          existing towards the North of the said road. On merits<\/p>\n
          also, it was pleaded that the plaintiff was neither the
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                        6<\/span><\/p>\n
            owner nor in possession of Khasra in question. It was<\/p>\n
            pleaded that the plaintiff had already sold his entire share<\/p>\n
            and had carved out a rasta of 18′ and had constructed a<\/p>\n
            road, which was left for the vendees as no one was ready<\/p>\n
            to purchase the land without a rasta to it. It was denied<\/p>\n
            that there was 12′ strip belonging to the plaintiff adjoining<\/p>\n
            the said rasta of 18′.       Refuting the allegations of the<\/p>\n
            plaintiff, the defendant prayed for the dismissal of the<\/p>\n
            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 the absolute owner in<\/p>\n
            possession of land shown in yellow and red colours in the<\/p>\n
            site plan attached with the plaint? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            2.            Whether the land portion shown in red colour<\/p>\n
                 is part and parcel of khasra No.2923\/3 belonging to the<\/p>\n
                 plaintiff. If so to what effect? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            3.            Whether the plaintiff is entitled for a decree for<\/p>\n
                 permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            4.            Whether the road allotted to the plaintiff vide<\/p>\n
                 judgment and decree dated 4.12.1995 still exists and<\/p>\n
                 has become public property as alleged? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            5.            Whether the suit is not maintainable in the<\/p>\n
            present form? OPD
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                      7<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           6.            Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder of<\/p>\n
                necessary parties? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           7.            Whether the plaintiff has no cause of action to<\/p>\n
                file the present suit? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           8.            Whether the plaintiff has concealed true and<\/p>\n
           material facts from the Court? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           9.            Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file<\/p>\n
           the present suit? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           10.           Relief. “<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of<\/p>\n
the opinion that the present appeal is devoid of any merit and<\/p>\n
deserves dismissal.\n<\/p>\n
           The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction that he<\/p>\n
was absolute owner of the land in dispute forming part of Khasra<\/p>\n
No.7289\/2923\/3 of Mauza Gurgaon village.          In order to prove his<\/p>\n
case, plaintiff examined ten witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
           Admittedly, the land was jointly owned by the parties and<\/p>\n
their brother Baljit Singh and was partitioned on 1.10.1995 by mutual<\/p>\n
arrangement followed by decree dated 4.12.1995 passed in civil suit<\/p>\n
No.1267 of 1995. Mutation No.18408 on the basis of the said decree<\/p>\n
was sanctioned on 20.3.1996.         Admittedly, plaintiff and defendant<\/p>\n
were given area measuring 289 \u00be x 84′ out of khasra No.2923. All<\/p>\n
the three brothers were given equal shares. It has been observed by<\/p>\n
the learned Additional District Judge in the impugned judgment that
\n R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M)                                   8<\/span><\/p>\n
Baljit Singh got 289 \u00be x 84′ out of khasra No.7289\/2922, defendant<\/p>\n
Satbir Singh got the same area out of khasra No.2923\/2 and the<\/p>\n
plaintiff got the same area out of khasra No.2923\/3.        Defendant,<\/p>\n
however, encroached upon the land belonging to his brother.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, 18 feet wide passage was left on the Southern side of<\/p>\n
khasra No.2923\/2. It has been observed by the learned Additional<\/p>\n
District Judge in the impugned judgment that a perusal of judgment<\/p>\n
dated 24.5.2006 passed in civil suit No.458 of 2000 revealed that<\/p>\n
defendant Satbir Singh had sold more than his land comprised in<\/p>\n
khasra No.2923\/2 and the said sale deed in favour of Khem Chand<\/p>\n
and Rakesh Kukreja was declared illegal, null and void.<\/p>\n
           Both the Courts below, after appreciating the evidence on<\/p>\n
record, have given a finding of fact that the land shown in yellow and<\/p>\n
red colour in site plan Ex.PW3\/2 was owned and possessed by the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and the passage left by the parties was being used by<\/p>\n
general public.   The said finding of fact, arrived at by the Courts<\/p>\n
below, cannot be interfered with by this Court in appeal.<\/p>\n
           No substantial question of law arises in this regular<\/p>\n
second appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                               (SABINA)\n                                                JUDGE\nOctober    23, 2009\nanita\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009 R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No. 3793 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.10.2009 Satbir Singh ……Appellant Versus Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh …….Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA […]<\/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-63693","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSatbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 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\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-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=\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-25T01:43:48+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-25T01:43:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1651,\"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\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-25T01:43:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 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":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 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\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-25T01:43:48+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-25T01:43:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009"},"wordCount":1651,"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\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009","name":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-25T01:43:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-singh-vs-jagbir-singh-jaibir-singh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Satbir Singh vs Jagbir Singh @ Jaibir Singh on 23 October, 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\/63693","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=63693"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63693\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63693"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63693"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63693"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}