Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Punjab vs Bhagwantpal Singh Alias Bhagwant Singh ... on 20 November, 2020
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra
1
ITEM NO.18 Court 5 (Video Conferencing) SECTION IV-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).17885/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14-09-2018
in RSA No. 447/2004 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at
Chandigarh)
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
BHAGWANTPAL SINGH ALIAS BHAGWANT SINGH
(DECEASED THROUGH LRS.) Respondent(s)
(WITH I.R. and IA No.94736/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and
IA No.94737/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.94739/2020-
EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT)
Date : 20-11-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Uttara Babbar, AOR
Ms. Bhavana Duhoon, Adv.
Mr. Manan Bansal, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1 Ms Uttara Babbar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submits that the High Court in a second appeal has erred in reversing the judgment of the first appellate court. Adverting to the written statement, learned counsel submitted that besides raising the plea of adverse possession, Signature Not Verified the main defense of the petitioners was founded on title. According to the Digitally signed by Sanjay Kumar petitioners, the land in question had been donated by the father of the plaintif Date: 2020.11.20 17:05:15 IST Reason: in 1958 for the setting up of a veterinary hospital. The documentary foundation for the defense was referred to in the written statement. 2 2 Moreover, it has been submitted that the documents which were produced during the course of the evidence in the suit, including Exhibit D-8 (a copy of which has been filed in the compilation of additional documents,) would indicate that the plaintif-respondent was aware as far back in 1981 of the status of the land. Hence, it has been submitted that the suit which was instituted in 2001 was barred by limitation by the provisions of Article 65 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act 1963. Disregarding the judgment of the first appellate court, it has been submitted that the High Court has decreed the suit in the second appeal.
3 Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay in filing the Special Leave Petition and on the Special Leave Petition, returnable in twelve weeks. 4 Pending further orders, there shall be an ad-interim stay of the operation of the impugned judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 14 September 2018 in RSA No 447 of 2004.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER