Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Inder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ranjeet Kaur – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. condonation of delay in re-filing an appeal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenge to the validity of documents based on alleged forgery. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments presented regarding the maintainability of suit. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. burden of proof on the appellants to validate the documents. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. final decision dismissing the appeal due to lack of merit. (Para 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT
Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral)
CM-3397-C-2020
Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of 100 days in re-filing the appeal.
Having heard learned counsel for the applicants-appellants and gone through the contents of the application, duly supported by an affidavit, sufficient cause has been made out for the purpose of condoning the delay of 100 days in re-filing the appeal. Accordingly, delay of 100 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. Application is allowed.
Main case
By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgments and decrees dated 05.09.2018 and 01.05.2019 passed by both the Courts below, whereby a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction filed at the instance of respondents-plaintiffs, has been decreed.
2. Admittedly, the parti
The judgment confirms that a suit can challenge forged documents affecting property rights and reaffirms co-sharer rights in joint possession cases.
The burden of proof regarding the validity of executory documents lies with the party alleging their legitimacy in property disputes.
The burden of proof rests on the party asserting forgery, and co-ownership entitles plaintiffs to seek declarations without claiming separate possession.
Registered documents are presumed valid, and the burden of proof for fraud lies on the alleging party, requiring clear and substantial evidence.
A registered General Power of Attorney, if unchallenged, retains legal effect, and deeds executed thereunder are valid despite subsequent allegations of fabrication.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of timely and proper legal action, and the need for plaintiffs to make clear and consistent pleadings to support their claims.
In a suit for declaration of title, the burden lies on the plaintiff to establish their title, and failure to do so results in dismissal, regardless of the defendants' claims.
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
