IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Amarjit Singh …Appellant Versus Hardeep Singh (Deceased) through LRs and others …Respondents

1. The date when the judgment is reserved February 10, 2026

2. The date when the judgment is pronounced April 28, 2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website April 28, 2026

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced or Full whether the full judgment is pronounced

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full judgment, and reasons Not applicable thereof CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Punit Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. G. S. Punia, Senior Advocate with Ms. Harveen Kaur, Advocate and Ms. Manleen Kaur, Advocate for respondents.1 and 2.

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.

This is defendant’s Regular Second Appeal against the judgment passed by learned Sub Judge first Class, Malerkotla, dated 20.04.1982, and judgment and decree passed in first appeal by learned Additional District Judge, Sangrur, dated 22.03.1990. The trial Court decreed the respondents’/plaintiffs’ suit for declaration and possession, holding them to be the owners of the agricultural land measuring 52 bighas 8 biswas and the house detailed in the headnote of the plaint; they were also held entitled to possession of the land measuring 19 bighas 11 biswas comprised in khasra no.148. Plaintiff Mukhinder Singh was further held to be the owner of tractor no. PUV 5570. And appellant/defendant no.1 Amarjit Singh was restrained by a decree of permanent injunction not to sell, mortgage, alienate or dispose of any portion of the suit property in any manner. The appeal against the decree was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court.

2. As per the facts on record, in brief, the respondents/ plaintiffs and appellant/defendant no.1 are sons of Hira Singh; defendants no.2 and 3 are the daughters of Hira Singh, who expired on 03.02.1980. At the time of his death, he was owner in possession of the suit property. He had executed a Will on 06.10.1975 bequeathing one tractor no. PUV 5570 to respondent/plaintiff no.2. As Hira Singh was not on good terms with his son, appellant/defendant no.1, the former executed the Will in question, dated 14.11.1979, at Moga, bequeathing all his properties, movable as well as immovable, in favour of respondents/plaintiffs in equal shares to the exclusion of the appellant/defendant no.1. It is also a fact on record that earlier Hira Singh had gifted away one-third share of his land measuring 188 bighas 3 biswas to his son, appellant/defendant no.1, and that during the former’s lifetime the latter filed a civil suit no.254 dated 28.07.1979, Ex P-3, for injunction against Hira Singh and the respondents/plaintiffs herein restraining them from alienating the suit land measuring 52 bighas and 8 biswas. The prayer for interim injunction in that suit was declined by the trial Court on 05.11.1979, Ex.P-54, and appeal against the same was also dismissed vide order dated 22.01.1980, Ex.P-51. Further, it is the respondents’/plaintiffs’ case that after the death of Hira Singh, the appellant/defendant no.1, in collusion with the village Patwari, got khasra Girdawari of 19 bighas 11 biswas entered in his name. In these circumstances, the suit in question was filed.

2.1. Upon notice, defendants no.2 and 3, daughters of Hira Singh filed a separate written statement and admitted the correctness of both the Wills aforementioned. They also stated that the plaintiffs had rendered services to their father till his death, and they gave up their share in the suit property.

2.2 Appellant/defendant no.1 admitted the relationship between the parties by stating that the land in question was a coparcenary property in which he as well as his brothers and father were equal share holders. His father Hira Singh had migrated from Pakistan and owned land in four villages there, which had been inherited by him from his father, Arjan Singh. This land wa