IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 03.02.2025 Pronounced on: 11.02.2025 PREHLAD KUMAR .... Appellant VERSUS AJIT ARORA & ANR. .... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.

ALKA SARIN, J.

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the defendant No.1- appellant challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2018 passed by the Trial Court and judgment and decree dated 21.09.2021 passed by the First Appellate Court.

2. The parties to the litigation are real brothers. Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-respondent No.1 filed a suit for declaration, separate possession and permanent injunction regarding a house, a plot and a shop. It was averred that the house was originally owned by the mother who had purchased it in 1974 from the joint family funds and the house was inherited by the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant after the mother died. The plaintiff-respondent No.1 was residing on the first floor of the house with his family members while the defendant No.1-appellant was residing on the ground floor with and his family members. The plaintiff-respondent No.1 and defendant no.1-

appellant were running a joint business and from the joint funds the plot was purchased by spending equal amounts from their pockets. However, since defendant No.1-appellant was the elder brother and the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant were living in a joint family so the sale deed of the plot was got executed only in the name of defendant No.1- appellant on 26.11.1979. The plaintiff-respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant are jointly running a shop under the name and style of Arora Sweets at Arya Samaj, Patiala and the said shop was joint in the names of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant having been purchased on 29.03.1996. The other brother i.e. defendant No.2-respondent No.2 was given a share from the joint funds, and he was settled at Delhi where he was residing with his family. The plaintiff-respondent No.1 averred that there were disputes between the parties and on 08.06.2013 a panchayat consisting of relatives and respectable persons was convened and in pursuance thereof a memorandum of family settlement took place which was reduced into writing in the presence of relatives and respectable persons when it was agreed that the defendant No.1-appellant shall be the owner in possession of the ground floor of the house and the plaintiff-respondent No.1 shall be the owner in possession of the first floor of the house and the third brother i.e. defendant No.2-respondent No.2 herein can raise construction on the second floor for which 50% expenses were to be incurred by him and 25% each would be borne by the other two brothers i.e. the plaintiff- respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant. It was also agreed that after selling the shop 1/2 share each shall be kept by the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and the defendant No.1-appellant. The plot was also agreed to be sold and 1/3^rd share was to go to the plaintiff-respondent No.1. However, despite this there were interferences by the defendant No.1-appellant and his family members leading to cases being filed against each other including complaints to the police. Hence, the suit.

3. The defendant No.1-appellant contested the suit. In the written statement though it was admitted that the parties were living separately on the ground floor and first floor of the house, it was denied that the construction was raised from the joint family funds. Regarding the plot, it was denied that the same was purchased out of the joint funds to the extent of 1/2 share each and the stand taken was that the defendant No.1-appellant alone is owner of the plot as he purchased it from his own funds and sources and it was his self acquired property. The existence of any family settlement of 08.06.2013 was denied. As per th