Jagmal Singh and Others vs Birender Singh and Others

Mahesh Grover, J.—The plaintiffs-appellants are in appeal assailing the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2005 passed by Additional District Judge, Narnaul (hereinafter referred to as `the lower Appellate Court'').

A suit for possession was filed by the appellants claiming ownership to the extent of 1/4th of the estate of Debu Singh alias Deb Singh son of Bhagtu Singh, who is said to have died issueless.

The respondents contested the suit to say that Debu Singh was married and had a daughter, Kaushalya, from the marriage with Parbati and in view of the natural heirs, the right to succession to the estate of Debu Singh would be in their favour and the appellants had no right to his estate. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues:

Whether the plaintiffs and proforma defendants are related to Debu Singh as per pedigree table given under para No. 1 of the plaint?OPP

Whether the plaintiffs and proforma defendants are entitled to the land of Debu Singh vide through judgment and decree dated 4.4.53 passed by the Sub Judge Ist Class, Narnaul and the judgment and decree dated .7.53 passed by the Additional Distt. Judge, Sangrur as alleged in the para No. 3 of the plaint?OPP

Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form? OPD

Whether plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present? OPD

Whether the plaintiff is estopped from filing the present suit by his own act and conduct?OPD

Whether the contesting defendants have constructed well and have made improvement on the suit land, if so, to what effect? OPD

Whether the contesting defendants are the bona fide purchase for consideration? OPD

Whether the suit of the plaintiff is false and frivolous and defendants are entitled for special costs, as referred us/ 35 (A) CPC? OPD

Relief.

After perusing the evidence on record, the trial Court came to the conclusion that Debu Singh was, indeed, issueless and went on to decree the suit of the appellants.

In appeal, the findings of the trial Court were reversed by the lower Appellate Court, which has led to the filing of the present appeal by the appellants. The lower Appellate Court recorded a finding, on the basis of the documents which were produced during the course of evidence, to say that Debu Singh was married to Parbati and had a daughter, Kaushalya, from the said marriage.

I have heard learned Counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

Shri Parbodh Mittal, learned Counsel for the appellants contended that the finding recorded by the lower Appellate Court is erroneous and against the record and that, in fact, Debu Singh was not married at all. He referred to gift deed Exhibit PW5/A wherein it has been recorded that Debu Singh was issueless. He contended that this gift deed is of the year 1968 and the gift was alleged to have been made in favour of some other collaterals.

After giving thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned Counsel, I am of the opinion that the appeal does not deserve to be accepted. The lower Appellate Court, while recording a finding that Parbati was the wife of Debu Singh, had relied upon Exhibit- PX which is the report regarding death of Debu Singh recorded at the behest of the Chowkidar of the village in which there is a reference about the wife of the deceased. The voter list Exhibit-DX and the entries in the ration card were also relied upon by the lower Appellate Court, which established the fact that Parbati was, indeed, the wife of Debu Singh. No explanation, worth the name, has been given by the appellants qua the above referred documents which were duly proved on the record.

In view of the above, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the lower Appellate Court. This Court, in a Regular Second Appeal, cannot re-appraise the evidence as has been held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the judgments reported as Thiagarajan and Others Vs. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil and Others, and Govindaraju Vs. Mariamman, .

No substantial question of law has been shown to have arisen in the present appeal which is held to be devoid of any merit and is dismissed as such.