{"id":97683,"date":"1954-12-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1954-12-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954"},"modified":"2016-05-13T02:18:03","modified_gmt":"2016-05-12T20:48:03","slug":"sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","title":{"rendered":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954<\/div>\n
Bench: M.C. Mahajan (Cj), N.H. Bhagwati, B. Jagannadhadas, T.L.V. Aiyyar<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  115 of 1953\n\nPETITIONER:\nSEWA SINGH & ORS.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nJANGIR SINGH & ORS. \n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 15\/12\/1954\n\nBENCH:\nM.C. MAHAJAN (CJ) & N.H. BHAGWATI & B.  JAGANNADHADAS & T.L.V.  AIYYAR &\nB.P. SINHA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
AIR  1956 SC 1<\/p>\n
The Judgment was delivered by :\n<\/p>\n
MAHAJAN C. J. : The facts giving rise to this appeal lie within a narrow
\ncompass, and can be shortly stated. One Bishan Singh, a Sikh Jat belonging
\nto the Dhande tribe, was the owner of the land in dispute which is situated
\nin Patti-Gainda of village Naraingarh in the State of PEPSU.\n<\/p>\n
On 8-4-1935 he adopted Jangir Singh, the plaintiff in the suit, by means of
\na registered deed and declared therein that Jangir Singh would inherit to
\nall his movable and immovable properties after his death. Bishan Singh died
\nsometime in April 1944. The mutation of the land, after his death, was
\nentered in the name of Jangir Singh but possession of it was taken by the
\ndefendants who are direct descendants of Gainda and are collaterals of
\nBishan Singh in the fifth degree.\n<\/p>\n
In this situation Jangir singh filed the present suit for possession
\nalleging that he being the adopted son of Bishan Singh was entitled to
\nsucceed to the property. The defendants denied the factum and validity of
\nhis adoption, and further pleaded that the land in suit was ancestral
\nproperty of Bishan Singh and under custom he had no right to dispose it of.\n<\/p>\n
2. On the pleadings of the parties the trial Judge framed four material
\nissues :\n<\/p>\n
(1) Whether the plaintiff was adopted by Bishan Singh?\n<\/p>\n
(2) Whether the adoption was valid?\n<\/p>\n
(3) Whether the defendants were collaterals of Bishan Singh?\n<\/p>\n
(4) Whether the property in dispute was ancestral qua the defendants?\n<\/p>\n
Issue No. 1 was decided in favour of the plaintiff but all the other issues
\nwere decided against him. In the result the plaintiff’s suit was dismissed,
\nthe parties being left to bear their own costs. On issue No. 4 the learned
\nJudge held that from the extract of the record of rights placed by the
\ndefendants on the record and the copy of the pedigree table it was clear
\nthat the land in dispute was ancestral qua the descendants of Gainda, the
\ncommon ancestor of this family.\n<\/p>\n
The adoption of the plaintiff was held invalid on the ground that according
\nto custom Bishan Singh could not adopt a descendant of his maternal
\ngrandfather and it was only a collateral or an agnatic relation who could
\nbe adopted amongst the Jats of these parts.\n<\/p>\n
3. The decision of the trial Judge was affirmed in appeal by the District
\nJudge who also took the view that a stranger to the family of the adopter
\ncould not be adopted under custom by which the parties were governed. On
\nthe ancestral nature of the property the learned District Judge observed as
\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n
    “The pedigree table of family No. 9 shows that the defendants are
\n    collaterals of Bishan Singh deceased in about the 5th degree. The
\n    common ancestro was Gainda, who had seven sons, namely, Chandu,
\n    Nagahia, Raja Ram, Himmata, Samonda, Lakha and Dayala. The holdings
\n    shown are Chandu 122 bighas 15 biswas, Nagahia 115 bighas 8 Biswas,
\n    Raja ram 123 bighas 2 Biswas, Himmata 115 Bighas 11 Biswas, Samonda 122
\n    bighas 16 biswas, Lakha 125 bighas 11 biswas and Dayala 129 bighas. It
\n    will be observed that the holdings of Chandu, Raja Ram, Samonda and
\n    Lakha are almost equal, and those of Nagahia and Himmata are again
\n    almost equal, and that of Dayala is somewhat larger than the others.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    In the Pemana Haqiat the descendants of each branch are shown to hold
\n    land as 1\/7th share of the total area. This leads to the conclusion
\n    that the land of Gainda, the common ancestor, was divided into seven
\n    shares and each one of the seven sons got 1\/7th share of the whole and
\n    consequently the descendants of each son are shown to possess shares of
\n    the that 1\/7th. The slight disparity in the areas held by these seven
\n    brothers must be due to the quality of the land, because out of seven
\n    brothers two hold almost equal areas and again three hold equal areas.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The plaintiff having been unsuccessful in the first two courts preferred a
\nsecond appeal to the High Court of PEPSU. This appeal was in the first
\ninstance heard by a single Judge who expressed of doubt as to the
\ncorrectness of the opinion of the two courts below regarding their
\ndecisions on the ancestral character of the land.\n<\/p>\n
A new point was urged before him that even if the adoption was invalid, the
\nproperty being self-acquired Bishan Singh could make a gift in favour of
\nJangir Singh and Bishan Singh having declared in the deed of adoption that
\nJangir Singh would inherit to his movable and immovable properties after
\nhis death, Jangir Singh was entitled to them.\n<\/p>\n
The learned Judge thinking that this question was of sufficient importance
\nto be decided by a larger bench directed the case to be laid before the
\nChief Justice for constituting a bench. The appeal was then heard by a
\nDivision Bench of the court. The bench reversed the concurrent finding of
\nthe first two courts on the question of the nature of the property and held
\nthat it had not been proved to be ancestral. The decision on this point was
\nstated in these terms :\n<\/p>\n
    “The copy of the pedigree table produced by the defendants goes to show
\n    that Gainda Singh was the common ancestor and Bishan Singh was his
\n    descendant in the fifth degree. Gainda Singh had seven sons. Of these
\n    Samonda was the ancestor of Bishan Singh, and the defendants are the
\n    descendants of his other sons, some in the fifth degree and some in the
\n    sixth.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    At the time of the first regular settlement which took place in 1962
\n    (1905-6 A. D.) the land held by Bishan Singh and other descendants of
\n    Gaina Singh were almost equal and it was from this fact that the Courts
\n    below appear to have drawn the presumption that the whole of the land
\n    was once owned by Gainda Singh and it devolved upon his descendants by
\n    succession.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    This is my opinion, and to the same extent was the opinion of my
\n    learned brother as expressed in the referring order, that the mere fact
\n    that remote descendants of a person are found to hold equal or almost
\n    equal amount of land at the time of first settlement, cannot by itself
\n    raise the presumption that the land came from the common ancestor. In
\n    the present case a reference to the copy of the Kafiat Delhi would go
\n    to show that the land was probably not owned by Gainda. According to
\n    that document the village was originally owned by two tribes, Rajputs
\n    and Dhande Jats. Later on the Rajputs’ Patti was abolished and the
\n    entire land of the village was taken hold of by the Jats.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    Afterwards certain other Jats and one family of Brahmans and one
\n    Guosains was allowed to settle in the village and in Samvat 1888 when a
\n    part of the village land was given to village Sangatpura, which then
\n    came into existence, there was a fresh allotment of lands and after
\n    that possession became the measure of right. In view of this fact, it
\n    is impossible to hold that the land of which every descendant of Gainda
\n    Singh was in possession at the time of first settlement, had devolved
\n    upon him from Gainda.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The Division Bench having decided that the land was not proved to be
\nancestral proceeded to refer the following questions to a Full Bench :\n<\/p>\n
“(1) Does the term” kinsman<\/p>\n
    “used in paragraph 35 of Rattigan’s Digest of Customary Law mean a
\n    collateral and if not, can a distant relation like the great-grandson
\n    of the adopter’s mother’s father’s brother be regarded a “kinsman”.\n<\/p>\n
    (2) If a person governed by Customary Law adopts another person as his
\n    son and the adoption is later on set aside as invalid according to
\n    custom, can the adopted son succeed to the non-ancestral property of
\n    the adoptive father on the ground that his adoption was tantamount to a
\n    gift or bequest”\n<\/p>\n
.\n<\/p>\n
The Full Bench answered both these questions in the affirmative. In other
\nwords it held that the expression “kinsman” referred in the Customary Law
\nhad reference to and meant agnatic relation and that a distant relation
\nlike that of the adopter’s mother’s father’s brother could not be included
\nwithin it. It further held that even if the adoption was invalid, the
\nadopted son could succeed to self-acquired property of the adopter on the
\nbasis that the adoption in these parts in tantamount to a gift or a
\nbequest.\n<\/p>\n
In the result the appeal was allowed and the plaintiff’s suit was decreed
\nas laid. The case was however certified to be a fit one for appeal to this
\ncourt under Art. 133 (a) of the Constitution of India. This appeal is now
\nbefore us in view of that certificate.\n<\/p>\n
4. In our judgment the appeal can be disposed of on the short ground that
\nthere was no justification whatsoever for setting aside the concurrent
\nfinding of the first two courts on the question of the character of the
\nland in dispute, and there is thus no necessity to resolve the legal
\nquestion raised, as in that view of the case the plaintiff’s suit is
\nadmittedly bound to fail. It appears from the entries in the pedigree table
\nprepared at the settlement of 1907-09 that Gainda, the common ancestor of
\nBishan Singh and of the defendants, had seven sons and Bishan Singh and the
\ndefendants represent the line of these sons, Bishan Singh having descended
\nfrom Samonda, while the defendants being the descendants of the other
\nbrothers of Samonda.\n<\/p>\n
Bishan Singh at the time of the regular settlement held 122 bighas 16
\nbiswas of land which was described as being 1\/7the share of the total
\nfamily holding. The shares of the descendants of the other sons of Gainda
\nSingh were also described in similar terms. Some of them held one-half of
\n1\/7th, others held one third of 1\/7th and so on. This subdivison was in
\naccordance with the number of the descendants of each one of the seven
\nsons. An explanatory note is appended to this pedigree and it is in these
\nterms :\n<\/p>\n
    “This Patti Gainda is known after the name of the ancestor of the
\n    proprietors and they are in its possession and pay land revenue.
\n    However, for division of Shamlat deh Rs. 8\/2\/6 in all according to the
\n    ancestral shares is entered in column……….”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
From these entries which carry a presumption of truth it is clear that the
\nwhole of the land which was once owned by the common ancestor was at the
\ntime of the regular settlement in possession of his descendants according
\nto ancestral share and the shamlat deh which is also in suit was also
\ndivisible according to ancestral shares.\n<\/p>\n
It has not been suggested that any to the descendants of Gainda Singh
\nacquired any land in this Patti by purchase of introduced strangers in it
\nby selling any portion of their ancestral holding. That being so, the
\nlearned District Judge was justified in drawing the inference from the
\ncircumstance of equality of holdings and the reference to these in terms of
\nancestral shares, that the land in suit had develved on Bishan Singh by
\ndescent from Gainda, and there were no valid grounds for referring that
\ndecision.\n<\/p>\n
The circumstances established in the case are compatible only with the
\ntheory that this land came to his sons from Gainda and these circumstances
\ncannot be explained on any other reasonable hypothesis.\n<\/p>\n
5. The High Court for its conclusion placed reliance on the “Kafiat
\nDehi”(village history) as given in the settlement record, this is what is
\nstated therein :\n<\/p>\n
    “Originally Tooni Rajputs, and our ancestors, that is, the ancestors of
\n    the proprietors Jat Dhande were in possession of the estate of this
\n    village in equal shares. In the times of Muslim Rulers the land revenue
\n    fell in arrear against Tooni Rajputs who absconded out of fear of
\n    harassment and violence at the hands of the then ruler. The common
\n    ancestor of Jats Dhande on payment of the arrears of land revenue
\n    acquired possession of the whole village and called the following
\n    families also and distributed them land as owners ……………….
\n    Since the village had passed into the ownership of a sole owner, the
\n    families who migrated afterwards got land according to their means.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    In 1831-32 A. D. some area of this village was set apart and a separate
\n    village named Sangatpura came into being, whereby the remaining scale
\n    of holding (Raha Saha Paimana Haqiyat) was also disturbed. It has been
\n    decided that the enhancement or reduction will depend upon the
\n    possession. That is to say, at present the revenue of Rs. 7-15-9 is
\n    paid on the land of ten dirams. As a matter of fact previously the sale
\n    was Rs. 8\/2\/6; ……… for the division of the Shamlat deh the
\n    original scale of Rs. 8\/2\/6 was entered in the pedigree table. The
\n    following six Pattis are named after the names of the ancestors; Sangu,
\n    Piru, Jalla, Malla, Hari Chand and Gainda.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
There is nothing in this document from which an inference could be drawn
\nthat there was any disturbance in the scale of holding in Patti Gainda. On
\nthe other hand the “Paimana Haqiyat”(measure of right) as given in the
\nrecords clearly indicates that the Patti is being held by the descendants
\nof Gainda according to ancestral shares. In these circumstances there was
\nno reason for doubting the ancestral character of the land in dispute in
\nthis case.\n<\/p>\n
We are further of the opinion that this was not a fit case in which a
\nconcurrent finding of the first two courts should have been set aside on
\nfurther appeal even if the finding was not binding under the law then
\nprevailing in PEPSU and the High Court could re-examine the finding in
\nsecond appeal.\n<\/p>\n
6. The result is that this appeal is allowed, the judgment of the High
\nCourt is set aside, and that of the trial judge dismissing the plaintiff’s
\nsuit is restored. In the circumstances of this case, we make no order as to
\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 Bench: M.C. Mahajan (Cj), N.H. Bhagwati, B. Jagannadhadas, T.L.V. Aiyyar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 115 of 1953 PETITIONER: SEWA SINGH & ORS. RESPONDENT: JANGIR SINGH & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15\/12\/1954 BENCH: M.C. MAHAJAN (CJ) & N.H. BHAGWATI […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97683","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nSewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - 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\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\" \/>\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=\"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-12T20:48:03+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954\",\"datePublished\":\"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-12T20:48:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\"},\"wordCount\":2363,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\",\"name\":\"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-12T20:48:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954\"}]},{\"@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":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - 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\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-12T20:48:03+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954","datePublished":"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-12T20:48:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954"},"wordCount":2363,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954","name":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1954-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-12T20:48:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sewa-singh-ors-vs-jangir-singh-ors-on-15-december-1954#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sewa Singh & Ors vs Jangir Singh & Ors on 15 December, 1954"}]},{"@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\/97683","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=97683"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97683\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97683"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97683"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97683"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}