Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bimla Kaur & Ors vs Rajan Sharma on 13 November, 2013
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
RSA No.1298 of 2011(O&M) #1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
RSA No.1298 of 2011(O&M)
Date of Decision:-13.11.2013
Bimla Kaur & Ors.
......Appellants.
Versus
Rajan Sharma.
......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:- Mr. Hardeep Singh, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Rishav Jain, Advocate for the respondent.
***
JASWANT SINGH, J.
Defendant nos.2 to 5/appellants are in second appeal against the concurrent findings returned by the Courts below, whereby suit for separate possession and permanent injunction filed by the respondent/plaintiff Rajan Sharma has been decreed by learned Civil Judge(Sr. Divn.), Patiala vide its judgment dated 24.03.2009 and the findings thereof have been affirmed by the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala vide its judgment and decree dated 18.12.2010.
In brief, facts of the case are that plaintiff/respondent alleged himself to be a co-owner to the extent of 100 square yards, being 4/6th share out of the house in question, which he allegedly purchased vide sale Mahajan Vinay 2013.12.30 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh RSA No.1298 of 2011(O&M) #2# deed dated 29.08.2001 from defendant nos.2 to 5 through their general power of attorney Gurdeep Singh Bedi. It was alleged that remaining 2/6th share i.e. 50 square yards belongs to defendant no.1 in which defendant nos.2 to 5 also assert their share. It was averred that now plaintiff does not intend to keep the property joint and therefore the present suit.
Upon notice, defendant no.5 Bimla Kaur contested the suit of the plaintiff and the remaining defendants were proceeded against ex- parte. In her written statement, Bimla Kaur denied the execution of the sale deed dated 29.08.2001 and it was stated that no GPA was given in favour of Gurdeep Singh Bedi and, therefore, he had no right/authority to execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. Neither of other averments were admitted and prayer was made for dismissal of the suit.
Replication was filed wherein the entire contents of the plaint were reiterated and those of the written statement were denied.
From the pleadings of the parties issues were framed. Both sides lead their evidence in support of their respective claims and after appreciating their evidence learned trial Court decreed the suit and findings thereof were affirmed by the learned lower Appellate Court. Hence the present second appeal.
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the case file carefully with their able assistance.
Learned Counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the courts below have not appreciating the evidence in the right perspective and have overlooked the fact that Gurdeep Singh Bedi had played fraud upon Mahajan Vinay 2013.12.30 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh RSA No.1298 of 2011(O&M) #3# the appellants by taking their signatures on some blank papers and stamp papers, which were later on converted into a GPA, on the basis of which, sale deed dated 29.08.2001 Ex.P-1 was executed in favour of plaintiff/respondent no.1.
On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent has argued that document Ex.P-1 and GPA Ex.P-5 are both registered documents which have been duly endorsed by the Sub Registrar and the said document, especially Ex.P-5 i.e. the GPA in favour of Gurdeep Singh Bedi was thumb marked/signed by all the appellants on various places and also on the endorsement made at the office of Sub Registrar. Thus, it was argued that no ground of any fraud having been played upon the defendants/appellants arise and rather they are trying to wriggle out of the sale deed and cause unlawful harm to the plaintiff/respondent.
After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and having gone through the case file carefully with their able assistance, this Court is of the considered view that the present second appeal is devoid of any merit and the same deserves to be dismissed.
A perusal of the paper book reveals that plaintiff has examined as many as four witnesses, including the witness Mahesh Kumar as PW-2, who is the attesting witness of the GPA Ex.P-5. The plaintiff had also examined Ajay Khanna (Deed Writer) as PW-3 who was the scribe of the said GPA. Both the said witnesses had proved the execution of the document Ex.P-5 and nothing came out from their cross examination to dent their veracity. Not only this, documents in question are registered documents and the same have been endorsed by the Sub Mahajan Vinay 2013.12.30 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh RSA No.1298 of 2011(O&M) #4# Registrar, which also contains the photograph of the defendants/appellants This fact has also been admitted by the defendants in their cross examination. A strong presumption is attached to the endorsement made by the Sub Registrar regarding the valid execution of the documents. Not only this, Ajay Khanna PW-3 Deed Writer has also proved the entry regarding the GPA Ex.P-5 in his register as Ex.P-6. This document also bears the signatures/thumb marks of the defendants. No rebuttal evidence has been lead by the defendants to rebut such strong evidence led by the plaintiff/respondent. Furthermore, the complaint given by the defendants/appellants against Gurdeep Singh Bedi to the SSP was also not pursued by the defendants/appellants and this fact also stands admitted by the DW-1 H.C. Balbir Singh in his cross examination. This fact goes a long way to prove that there was no genuineness in the complaint preferred by the appellants and it was only an eye wash to wriggle out of the sale deed already executed by them through their power of attorney in favour of plaintiff/respondent.
In view of the above, finding no question of law, much less substantial question of law arising for determination in the present second appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.
( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE November 13, 2013 Vinay Mahajan Vinay 2013.12.30 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document at Chandigarh