Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
JASPREET SINGH
Ashok Kumar (In-Person) – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation Barabanki – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jaspreet Singh, J.
Ref:- C.M.A. Nos. 25 and 26 of 2024
1. The aforesaid applications have been moved by the petitioners to bring on record the heirs of deceased respondent no. 5 who is reported to have died on 20.05.2020.
2. Having considered the aforesaid application as well as its accompanying affidavit wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner did not have the knowledge regarding the death of respondent no. 5 but only when the office report dated 09.01.2024 was recorded in the order of this Court dated 21.02.2024 that the petitioner became aware and thereafter the application has been moved.
3. Having considered the aforesaid application and the ground shown therein, this Court finds that there is no legal impediment in allowing the application, moreover, the record also indicates that the notices were issued to the proposed legal heirs and despite the service being sufficient as indicated in the office report dated 22.08.2024, no objections have been filed, hence, the application is allowed and the petitioner who appears in person shall carry out the necessary amendment in the array of parties.
On merit/petition.
4. The dispute in question relate to Plot Nos. 416, 472, 4
Claims of co-tenancy require proof of continuous identity of property in the name of a common ancestor; failure to establish this results in dismissal.
The burden of proof lies on the party claiming co-tenancy, and long-standing revenue records cannot be disturbed without substantial evidence.
To establish co-tenancy rights over ancestral property, the unchanged identity of the land throughout generations must be shown, which was not proven in this case.
To establish co-tenancy rights, it must be shown that property has come down intact from a common ancestor without change in identity.
To establish co-tenancy rights in ancestral property, claimants must prove the unbroken identity of the holding over time, which the petitioners failed to do.
Point of law : There is no presumption of a property being joint family property only on account of existence of a joint Hindu family. The one who asserts has to prove that property is a joint family....
The court emphasized the necessity of establishing evidence for claims of co-tenancy and inheritance, ruling that the Deputy Director's findings lacked sufficient support.
The onus of proving property as ancestral lies with the claimant, requiring evidence of purchase from Joint Hindu Family funds, not merely acceptance of a family tree.
Co-tenancy claims require demonstration of ancestral ties and continuity; mere presumption of joint heritage is insufficient for property 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
