Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Balwant Sigh – Appellant
Versus
Harnam Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal arises from partition lawsuit. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant claims prior family partition. (Para 3 , 6 , 12 , 15 , 19) |
| 3. courts emphasize validity of revenue records. (Para 5 , 21 , 22 , 24) |
| 4. both sides present evidence for their claims. (Para 8 , 13 , 16 , 30) |
| 5. second appeal dismissed; no merit. (Para 32) |
The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, as passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur, H.P. dated 11.12.2024, whereby the appeal filed by the present appellant was dismissed and the judgment and decree, as passed by learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Hamirpur, H.P., dated 23.09.2023, was affirmed whereby the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for partition was decreed.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for partition before learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Hamirpur, H.P, on the ground that the parties are co-owners in joint possession of the suit property comprised in Khata No.26, Khatauni No.44, Khasra No.512, area measuring 00-04-78 hectares and Khatauni No.45, Khasra No.514 area measuring 00-00-40 hectares (total area 00-05-18 hectares) as per jamabandi for the year
The presumption of truth in the revenue record regarding joint ownership prevails, establishing that separate possession does not equate to partition without legal acknowledgment under relevant land ....
A joint family is presumed to remain joint unless a clear severance of status is proven, even without a physical division of property.
In disputes regarding partition of joint Hindu family property, the burden of proof lies on the party asserting partition, and the presumption of jointness remains unless clear evidence to the contra....
Family arrangements promoting peace and preventing disputes are upheld; oral partitions must be substantiated by clear evidence to be enforceable.
In second appeals under CPC Section 100, no interference with concurrent findings of fact unless substantial question of law or perversity; co-sharers may develop joint property if partition not impo....
Revenue records do not confer ownership; adverse possession requires clear and unequivocal evidence of denial of title.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
