Back
2002 Supreme(P&H) 806
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Satish Kumar Mittal, J.
Sohan Singh - Petitioner
Versus
Gurmej Singh and others - Respondents
Regular Second Appeal No. 534 of 1982.
Decided On : 16 August, 2002
For the Petitioner:M.S. Khaira, Senior Advocate with Mukesh Gandhi, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the validity of gift deeds and the importance of fulfilling the legal requirements for inheritance claims.
Headnote:
Inheritance - Property Dispute - Gift Deeds, Will - 16.4.1964, Ex.P1, Ex.P2, 1.3.1973, Ex.D3 - The court discussed the validity of gift deeds and a registered will in a property dispute. The court found that the gift deeds were result of fraud and were never acted upon, while the will was duly proved. The suit was held to be barred by limitation.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the inheritance of a deceased's estate between two claimants, one based on gift deeds and the other based on a registered will. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the gift deeds were not proved and the will was duly proved, and the suit was barred by limitation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the gift deeds were result of fraud and were never acted upon, while the will was duly proved. The suit was also held to be barred by limitation.
Issues: The issues included the validity of gift deeds, possession of the suit land, the effect of the alleged fraud, the validity of the will, and the ancestral nature of the suit land.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the gift deeds were result of fraud and were never acted upon, while the will was duly proved. The suit was also held to be barred by limitation.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Satish Kumar Mittal, J. - On the death of one Bhan Singh, who was issueless, the question of inheritance of his estate arose, two claims were raised, one by plaintiffs (appellants herein), who are sons of Bishan Singh, brother of deceased Bhan Singh, who claimed the entire property of Bhan Singh on the basis of gift deeds dated 16.4.1964, Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, and the second claim was made by the defendants (respondents herein), who are sons of other two brothers of Bhan Singh, on the basis of a registered will dated 1.3.1973, Ex. D3, vide which Bhan Singh bequeathed his property by giving 1/3rd share to the plaintiffs-appellants and 2/3rd share to the defendants-respondents. The mutation of inheritance of Bhan Singh was initially sanctioned by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Taran Taran in favour of the plaintiffs- appellants on the basis of alleged gift deeds vide his order dated 11.2.1972 but the said order was set aside in appeal by the Collector, Amritsar, vide his order dated 29.8.1972 and mutation was sanctioned in favour of the contesting defendants-respondents as well as plaintiffs-appellants on the basis of aforesaid registered Will dated 1.3.1973. The claim of the plaintiffs-appellants to the entire estate of Bhan Singh on the basis of gift deeds dated 16.4.1964 was not accepted by the revenue authorities as the appeal of the plaintiffs appellants against the order of the Collector was dismissed by the Commissioner, Jullundar Division, Jullundur, vide his Order dated 6.2.1978. Ex.D5. Thereafter, on 31.3.1978, the present suit for declaration was filed by the plaintiffs-appellants, alleging therein that they are owners in possession of the land in question measuring 54 kanals 13 marlas, owned and possessed by Bhan Singh on the basis of gift deeds dated 16.4.1964, Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 and the defendants-respondents be restrained from taking forcible possession of the suit land except in due course of law.
2. The defendants-respondents, in whose favour the mutation was sanctioned, contested the suit by alleging that Bhan Singh never made any gift deeds in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants nor the alleged gift deeds saw the light of the day till his death and these were never acted upon. Possession of the land in question always remained with Bhan Singh and the same was never delivered to the plaintiffs-appellants. It was further asserted that Bhan Singh executed a registered Will dated 1.3.1973, Ex.D3, in favour of all the sons of his three brothers, vide which 1/3rd share was given to the plaintiffs-appellants being sons of his one brother and 2/3rd was given to the defendants-respondents being sons of his other two brothers. On the basis of the aforesaid Will, the mutation of the land in question was sanctioned in favour of all the beneficiaries. The plaintiffs-appellants contested the aforesaid mutation on the basis of alleged gift deeds in their favour. The appeal filed by them against sanctioning of the mutation in favour of the defendants-respondents was dismissed by the Commissioner.
3. On the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial court framed following issues :
1. Whether Bhan Singh deceased executed two gift deeds dated 16.4.64 in favour of the plaintiffs ? OPP
2. Whether plaintiffs are in possession of the suit land as owner ? OPP
3. If issue No. 1 is proved, whether the alleged gift deeds are a result of fraud and wrong transaction, if so its effect ? OPD
4. Whether Bhan Singh deceased executed a valid will dated 1.3.73 in favour of the defendants ? OPD
5. Whether suit land is ancestral of Bhan Singh qua defendants, if so its effect ? OPD
6. Relief.
4. The learned trial court dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs-appellants vide judgment and decree dated 30.4.1979, while holding that it has not been proved on record that deceased Bhan Singh executed two valid gift deeds dated 16.4.1964, Ex. P1 and Ex.P2, in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants. Rather, it has been proved on record that these gift deeds were
