IN THE HIGH Court OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 11.03.2025 Sunita ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Sanjay and others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Akhil Kamra, Advocate for Dr. Anand K. Bishnoi, Advocate for the appellant.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

CM-19395-C-2018 Prayer in this application filed under Section 151 CPC is for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing the accompanying appeal.

Heard.

For the reasons mentioned in the application which is supported by an affidavit of the applicant/petitioner, the same is allowed and delay of 22 days in filing the accompanying appeal is condoned.

RSA-14992-2018 (O&M)

The present appeal has been filed by plaintiff No.2 against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby the suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction filed by the appellant/plaintiff No.2, has been dismissed by both the Courts below.

At the very outset, it may be pointed out that the present appeal is of the year 2018. However, notice has not yet been issued in the same as since 2018, the matter has been adjourned multiple times either due to non-appearance of, or at request of ld. counsel for the appellant.

The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before the learned trial Court i.e. the appellant is the ‘plaintiff No.2’; and the respondents are the ‘defendants’.

It may also be pointed out that the present suit, was dismissed as withdrawn qua plaintiff No.1 vide order dated 14.08.2010 passed by the learned trial Court.

Briefly stated, the case of the plaintiff No.2 is that land in question is ancestral and joint Hindu family property of defendant No.2 (who is father of the plaintiffs, and grandfather of defendant No.1) and is recorded as Karta of Hindu Undivided Family. However, the defendant No.1 (who is son of brother of plaintiff No.2) managed to get a fraudulent Release Deed dated 29.04.2004 executed in his favour by defendant No.2, whereby defendant No.2 released 1/3rd of his land in favour of his grandson/defendant No.1; and further fraudulently got Mutation No. 1103 sanctioned in his favour on the basis of the said Release Deed; whereafter defendant No.1 sold 1K 8M out of 6K 13M to defendants No. 3 to 5 vide Sale Deed dated 20.01.2006 in respect of which Mutation No. 1139 was also sanctioned.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff No.2 that as the suit land was ancestral in nature in the hands of defendant No.2, he was not competent for executing the Release Deed in favour of defendant No.1 or alienating the suit land without legal necessity. Learned counsel submits that the appellant had duly proved on record the ancestral nature of the suit property by way of Jamabandi for the year 2004-05 (Ex.P1), in which it is recorded that defendant No.2 had received the suit property in ‘Virasat’. It is further submitted that defendant No.2 was mentally unfit to execute the impugned Release Deed due to illness since 1985 and was under medical treatment. Learned counsel further contends that defendant No.1 has been living separately for over 15 years from defendant No.2 and never provided any care to defendant No.2. Therefore, the ostensible reason cited by defendant No.2 for making defendant no.1 beneficiary vide the impugned Release Deed, and excluding the plaintiff, is also not viable. Furthermore, possession of the suit land was only handed over to defendant No.1.

It is further contended that defendants No.3 to 5 purchased a part of the suit property based on illegal Sale Deed executed by defendant No.1; and, therefore, Mutation No. 1139 sanctioned on basis of illegal Sale Deed is not sustainable. It is accordingly prayed that the suit of the plaintiff be decreed and a declaration be made that the Release Deed dated 29.04.2004 and Mutation No. 1103 are null and void; and further declaration is prayed for that the Sale Deed dated 20.01.2006 and subsequent Mutation No. 1139 are illegal and void.