Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kaptan Singh vs Suresh Chand Sharma on 29 August, 2018

Author: Amit Rawal

Bench: Amit Rawal

RSA No.4182 of 2017 (O&M)                                                     1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH
                                   RSA No.4182 of 2017 (O&M)
                                   Date of decision : 29.08.2018

Kaptan Singh
                                                              ... Appellant
                                          Versus
Suresh Chand Sharma
                                                             ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present:Mr. Ankush Chaudhary, Advocate for
        Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate for the appellant.
              ****
AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL)

The appellant-plaintiff has not been successful before the lower Appellate Court in defending the decree of ejectment passed by the trial Court.

Learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff submitted that the suit for ejectment was filed by the plaintiff against the defendant as both the parties to the lis are none-else, but the brothers being sons of Gordhan Dass. The plaintiff asserted the right/title in the property on the basis of the Will dated 21.09.1985, purportedly executed by Gordhan Dass, in his favour. It was alleged that the suit for ejectment was filed owing to the de-notification of the area as Municipal Committee as per the provisions of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act 1973. The trial Court believed that the Will had been proved through the attesting witness. The statement of PW-3, Anand Parkash, attesting witness, had not been shattered despite extensive cross-examination, therefore, the lower Appellate Court abdicated in reversing the well-reasoned judgment and decree of the trial Court. The sole basis for reversing the finding was that the appellant-plaintiff participated in the execution of Will, that cannot be treated as fatal keeping 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 21:09:38 ::: RSA No.4182 of 2017 (O&M) 2 in view the relationship between the parties i.e. testator and plaintiff, thus, there is gross illegality and perversity in the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff, appraised the paper book and of the view that there is no force and merit in the submissions of Mr. Chaudhary, for, it has been proved on record through cross-examination of PW3 Anand Parkash that the plaintiff-Kaptan Singh had participated in the execution of the Will executed by Gordhan Dass. It is a settled law that a beneficiary, who has been instrumental in obtaining the Will in his favour, the same cannot be looked into and deemed to have been suffering from suspicious circumstances. This is the precise finding of the lower Appellate Court. In other words, the witness of the plaintiff has shattered the case of the plaintiff. No other witness or deed writer has been examined. In such circumstances, the lower Appellate Court being the last Court of fact and law, in my view, had examined evidence in correct perspective.

Keeping in view the aforementioned facts, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court, much less, no substantial question of law arises for determination.

No ground is made out for interference.

The present regular second appeal is dismissed.



                                                     ( AMIT RAWAL)
29.08.2018                                               JUDGE
 Yogesh Sharma

                     Whether speaking/reasoned        Yes
                     Whether Reportable                        No




                                    2 of 2
                 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2018 21:09:38 :::