IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 21.01.2026 Hazura Singh ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Hakam Singh and others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. D.V.Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

******

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Plaintiff is in Second Appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below; whereby suit filed by the appellant for declaration, possession, and permanent injunction, has been dismissed by both the Courts below.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellant had filed the present suit seeking decree for declaration to the effect that the agricultural land purchased in the names of the defendants along with their father Late Shri Ram Kishan on different dates vide registered sale deed no. 2691/1 dated 24.07.1978 pertaining to agricultural land measuring 4 Acres comprised in Khasra no. 6/20(8-0), 21(8-0), 22(8-0), 23 (8-0), 24 (8-0), 25 (8-0), 16 (8-0), 12/5 (8-0), sale deed no. 827/1 dated 13.05.1980 pertaining to agricultural land comprised in khasra no. 4/3 (6- 8), sale deed no. 1971 dated 16.06.1981 pertaining to agricultural land measuring 20 Kanals 11.5 marlas comprised in khasra no. 6/11 (3-18), 12 (4-7), 13 (5-18) 14 (2-11), 19 (8-0) situated in village Sarangpur Tehsil and District Ambala and sale deed no. 5774 dated 18.11.1986 pertaining agricultural land measuring 1Kanal 15 Marlas comprised in khasra no. 10/20/2 (7-11) situated in village Rupamazra Tehsil and District Ambala is joint Hindu Family property as the same were purchased out of the joint Hindu family funds (hereinafter to be referred as suit property). The plaintiff also sought relief of decree for declaration to the effect that he is owner of equal share along with the defendants of the aforesaid agricultural lands; and challenging Will no.489 dated 25.02.2010 and alleged that same is result of fraud and misrepresentation and is not binding upon the rights of the plaintiff. Consequently mutation no. 644 dated 07.07.2011 sanctioned on the basis of of alleged Will was also challenged. The plaintiff also sought relief of possession of his share of the suit property; and relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the suit property.

3. Upon appraisal of the pleadings and the evidence led by the parties, the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ambala had dismissed the suit of the plaintiff vide judgment and decree dated 06.11.2017. The Civil Appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Ambala vide judgment and decree dated

06.03.2020. Hence, the present second appeal by the plaintiff.

4. It is inter alia submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that the appellant is the eldest son of Testator Sh. Ram Kishan. The appellant had served his father and the family throughout his life.

Appellant had spent huge amount of money on the treatment of his mother when she suffered major mental shock on the death of her son Daljeet Singh. In 1978, on the request of his father, he kept his brother/defendant No.3 and bore all his expenses from 1981-1986. In 1980, again at the request of his father, appellant had kept his other brother/defendant No.4 and bore all his expenses from 1983 to 1989. Appellant also helped his father in solemnizing marriage of his sister. It is submitted that the record is replete with evidence that plaintiff has served his father and acquiesced to all his demands; and that he had good relations with the testator.

5. Ld. Senior counsel further submits that the plaintiff had purchased 2 acres of land on 18.03.1975; 6K 8M on 13.05.1980; 4K 2.1/2 M on 16.06.1981; and 1K 10M on 18.11.1986 from his own savings and savings of his wife. These lands had remained under the cultivation of father of the appellant Ram Kishan till 1989 and entire income was utilized by Ram Kishan to purchase land as mentioned in para 11 of the plaint. Thereaft