IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on 07^th of April, 2025 Pronounced on 07^th July, 2025 RSA No.1151 of 1994 Santra Devi ....Appellant Versus Ramji Lal and others .....Respondents RSA No.3844 of 1999 Ramji Lal and another ....Appellants Versus Santra .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for the appellant in RSA-1151-1994 and for the respondent in RSA-3844-1999.

Mr. Kuldeep Sharma, Advocate for the appellants in RSA-3844-1999 and for respondents No.1 to 3 in RSA-1151-1994.

Mr. Pavan Malik, Advocate for respondents No.4 & 5 in RSA-1151-1994.

PANKAJ JAIN, J.

By way of present judgment, I intend to dispose off afore-

captioned two appeals between the same parties, arising out of two separate suits.

2. Rival parties are fighting for the estate left by Dhanna son of Mahadev. RSA No.1151 of 1994 arises out of Civil Suit bearing No.68 of

1982 filed by appellant Santra Devi. RSA No.3844 of 1999 arises out of Civil Suit No.69/02.09.1982 filed by appellant Ramji Lal.

3. Santra Devi claims herself to be adopted daughter of Dhanna and has propounded Will, dated 15.05.1980, claiming it to be executed by Dhanna in her favour. Ramji Lal and others are claiming right to the property of Dhanna on the basis of judgment and decree dated 12.03.1981 and that dated 19.01.1981 suffered by Dhanna in their favour qua immoveable property left by him.

4. Santra Devi challenged judgment and decree dated 19.01.1981 passed in Civil Suit No.337/14.06.1980 titled as ‘Ramji Lal vs. Dhanna’ whereby Dhanna transferred agricultural land in favour of Ramji Lal and others.

5. Civil Suit No.60, dated 02.09.1982 has been filed by Ramji Lal and others against Santra Devi seeking possession of the property in form of a residential house owned by Dhanna son of Mahadev, claiming to have been transferred in their favour by Dhanna vide Civil Decree dated

12.03.1981.

6. In the suit preferred by Santra Devi, both the Courts found that Santra Devi failed to prove herself to be adopted daughter of Dhanna. Courts below further held that judgment and decree suffered by Dhanna in favour of Ramji Lal and others, dated 19.01.1981 was a valid decree and held Ramji Lal and others entitled to succeed to the agricultural land left by Dhanna.

7. The suit filed by Ramji Lal and others claiming possession of the residential house left by Dhanna, stands dismissed. Santra has been held to be a validly adopted daughter of Dhanna and in possession of house in question.

8. Resultantly, there are conflicting findings recorded by the Courts below which are subject matter of present appeals.

9. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it will be apt to refer to the series of lis between the parties.

10. From the records of the case, it is discernible that Ramji Lal and others filed Civil Suit No.337/14.06.1980 seeking decree of declaration to the effect that they are owners in possession of agricultural land owned by Dhanna on the strength of oral family settlement dated 15.06.1978. Another Civil Suit bearing No.129 dated 05.03.1981 titled as ‘Ramji Lal vs. Dhanna’ was also filed claiming right over the residential house. Both the suits were decreed in favour of Ramji Lal and others. Prior to filing of Civil Suit No.337 of 14.06.1980, Santra Devi filed Civil Suit No.324 of 12.06.1980 titled as ‘Santra vs. Dhanna’ seeking injunction restraining Dhanna from transferring his property in favour of Ramji Lal and others. Initially ad interim ex parte injunction was granted in favour of Santra Devi, however, the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 20.05.1981. The order is on record as Exhibit D-7 in the Civil Suit No.68 of 01.10.1982, out of which RSA No.1151 of 1994 has arisen. She filed application in the suit filed by Ramji Lal and others vs. Dhanna i.e. Civil Suit No.337 of 1980 seeking impleadment as a party. The said application was dismissed vide order dated 19.01.1981. The suit filed by Ramji Lal and others was