Read Order: Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others
Chandigarh, May 31, 2022: While dealing with an appeal filed by a widow claiming right over suit property on the basis of natural succession, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the concurrent finding of facts arrived at by the Courts below and opined that the appellant’s husband was not the owner of the suit land on the date of his death and the question of inheritance of the estate did not arise.
The Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal was considering a matter wherein the plaintiff had filed the appeal while assailing the correctness of the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the Courts below.
The plaintiff claimed property on the basis of natural succession. It was her claim that the property in question was owned and possessed by her husband late Sh. Baldev Singh. She filed a suit against four of her sons and subsequent purchasers from the said sons.
In the written statement, the defendants submitted that late Sh. Baldev Singh in the Civil Court acknowledged his four sons to be the owners in possession of the property resulting in a judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in their favour. The sons also claimed that late Sh. Baldev Singh, as a precautionary measure, bequeathed the property by an unregistered Will of November 1994, to them.
It was stated that the third defendant adopted the second defendant’s son and now the intention of the third defendant and his wife became dishonest and that was the reason why they have challenged the adoption. It also came on record that the sons had transferred the property in favour of the fifth and the sixth defendant by the registered sale deeds on receipt of valuable consideration.
After considering these rival submissions, the Court observed that both the Courts below recorded the finding that the plaintiff did not challenge the correctness of Civil Court judgment and decree. Also, Justice Kshetarpal noted that the lower courts held that late Sh. Baldev Singh was not the owner of the suit land on the date of his death, hence the Court held that the question of inheritance of the estate did not arise.
Consequently, finding no merit in the facts of the case, the present appeal was dismissed.