SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(MP) 205

S.R.DAS, S.J.IMAM, A.K.SARKAR
KIRPAL KUAR – Appellant
Versus
BACHAN SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ACHHRU RAM, P.L.Goyal, RAGHBIR SINGH GUPTA, S.S.Dhillon

SARKAR, J.

( 1 ) THE only question for decision in this appeal is whether title had been acquired to certain lands by adverse possession.

( 2 ) RAM Ditta was a Hindu Jat of village Bhathal in District Bassi which was originally in Patiala but subsequently came to be included in Patiala and Eastern Punjab States Union. He died in April or May 1920 leaving certain lands which were the subject matter of dispute in the suit out of which appeal arises. Ram Ditta had a son named Jeona who predeceased him leaving a widow, Harnam Kaur. Harnam Kaur has a daughter, Kirpal Kaur and the latter is the appellant before us. Kirpal Kaur has a son of the name of Satwant Singh. Ram Ditta had certain collateral relations and the dispute was between them on the one hand and Harnam Kaur and Kirpal Kaur on the other. These collaterals are the contesting respondents in this appeal.

( 3 ) ON Ram Ditta's death Harnam Kaur took possession of the lands, and on 24-8-1920, she obtained a mutation of the settlement records showing her as the owner of the lands in the place of Ram Ditta. By a deed dated 27-11-1929, she purported to make a gift of half of the lands to Kirpal Kaur on the occasion of the latter's ma
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top