CASE TITLE- Vishnu Singh S/O Jagdish Singh Vs Kamal Singh and Ors.
CASE NUMBER- Second Appeal No. 76 of 2021
DATED ON- 18.06.2024
QUORUM- Honourable Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh
FACTS OF THE CASE
The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for declaration of title regarding the suit property situated in village Sukakhedi, total land measuring 9.962 hectares in full part and on 6.985 hectares for declaring the title on 1/2 part along with declaring that sale-deed as null and void and injucting plaintiffs by permanent injuction to interfere in the possession and use of suit land by plaintiff. On an appeal by the plaintiff, learned Second Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal.
LEGAL PROVISIONS
Section 63 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT
The appellant contented that, there was a Will dated in favour of the plaintiff. Santribai, wife of late Nepal Singh had willed the suit property to him as she was issueless but defendants partitioned the suitland on false ground and obtained a revenue order in favour of Indira Bai.
CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT
The defendant contented that late Nepal Singh, husband of Santribai had purchased the suit land from joint family income in his name, therefore, Santribai and Indirabai, both were entitled.
COURT’S ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT
The court analyzed that, plaintiff witness No.2 Gulzar Singh as per Section 63 of Hindu Succession Act has not stated that Santribai had signed the Will before him therefore, the execution of the Will was proved is incorrect. Even otherwise, plaintiff Vishnu Singh admitted that Nepal Singh did not have any other extra income besides agricultural income and regarding the statement that land was purchased from the gold and jewellery received from father and mother of Santribai, there were no pleadings of the plaintiff in the suit, therefore, evidence without pleading cannot be accepted. Moreover, the suit should have been filed within three years but the suit was filed after the limitation time bar. The court held that no substantial question of law arises on which this second appeal can be admitted and the appeal got dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement Reviewed By- Shreyasi Ghatak
