Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

CM-4021-C-2012 IN RSA-1490-2012 This is an application under Order 22 Rule 2(c), Chapter 1 Part C of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Order, read with Section 151 of C.P.C. for leave to make the applicant as appellant and to file the RSA before this Court against the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2011.

For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed and and leave to make the application as appellant and to file the RSA before this Court is granted.

2 of 19 RSA No.5041 of 2011 & CM-4023-C-2012 IN RSA-1490-2012 For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed and the delay of 14 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

MAIN CASES This order of mine shall dispose of four appeals bearing RSA No.5041 of 2011 titled as "Sadhu Singh (deceased through LRs) V/s Gurdeep Singh and others", RSA No.284 of 2012 titled as "Gian Kaur V/s Gurdeep Singh and others", RSA No.3288 of 2012 titled as "Harbhajan Kaur V/s Gurdeep Singh and others" and RSA-1490-2012 titled as "Jang Singh (deceased through LRs) V/s Gurdeep Singh and others", involving identical question of law and facts.

Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Abhinav Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/defendant-Gian Kaur, sister of Surjit Kaur, in RSA-284-2012, 6 of 19 RSA No.5041 of 2011 & submitted that both the Courts below have committed a gross illegality and perversity ignoring the fact that the Will was surrounded by the suspicious circumstances as Surjit Kaur on the next day i.e. 08.04.1996 was allegedly murdered by her brother-Sadhu Singh, who later on was acquitted vide judgment dated 24.01.2000, as the Will was executed at Village Kandoor Sahib, District Ludhiana, whereas Surjit Kaur was resident of Village Warreh, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur. There is no compliance of Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act as the desire of the testator is not crystal clear, for, it has not come on record through the testimony of Malkiat Singh and Nazar Singh that they had appended their signatures or thumb- impressions on the instruction and dictation of the testator. It is mandatory requirement of law. In support of his contentions, he relies upon the ratio decidendi culled out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Janki Narayan Bhoir V/s Narayan Namdeo Kadam" 2003(1) RCR (Civil) 409 and as well as the decision dated 13.12.2016 of this Court rendered in RSA No.5252 of 2012 titled as "Kanwaljeet Kaur V/s Joginder Singh Badwal (deceased through LRs) and others". No evidence has come on record whether at any point of time, Surjit Kaur lived with Gurdip Singh, even, the last rites were performed at Village Warreh and not at Kandoor Sahib or even, in the Village of the beneficiary Gurdip Singh i.e. Village Korotana. If at all Gurdip Singh had good relation with Surjit Kaur, bhog ceremony would have been performed in the Village of Gurdip Singh. All these factors, if read in cumulative, would have led to the dismissal of the suit, thus, there is gross illegality and perversity.

Therefore, I do not intend to frame the substantial questions of law while deciding the appeals, aforementioned.

Keeping in view the aforementioned facts, I am of the view that both the Courts below have committed illegality and abdication as the Will suffered from legal flaw, therefore, the same is discarded. The judgments and decrees of the Courts below are hereby set aside and the suit is dismissed.

Resultantly, the appeal bearing RSA No.284 of 2012 is allowed and the other three appeals bearing RSA No.5041 of 2011, RSA No.1490 of 2012 and RSA No.3288 of 2012 are dismissed.