Valmiki J. Mehta, J. (Oral):--

1. This Regular Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugning the judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 3.8.2009 and the appellate Court dated 22.12.2012; by which the suit of the appellant/plaintiff for declaration and injunction with respect to property bearing Municipal No. 3738, Gali No. 17, Rehghar Pura, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 was dismissed. In the suit, declaration was prayed that the registered sale deed dated 28.3.1990 executed by the father of the appellant/plaintiff late Sh. Panna Lal in favour of the defendant is illegal and void because the property was an HUF property and not the exclusively owned property of the father.

2. Both the courts below have held that the appellant/plaintiff has failed to prove existence of any HUF whatsoever. In this Court, I put a query to the counsel for the appellant as to what documentary evidence the appellant/plaintiff has led to prove existence of HUF and to which query it is admitted that not a single document has been filed to show the existence of HUF between the appellant/plaintiff and father late Sh. Panna Lal. It is only argued before thi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document