Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     Smell of Alcohol in Post-Mortem Insufficient to Establish Intoxication: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Liability of Insurance Company in Motor Accident Case    |     No Grounds for Transfer: Free Bus Fare for Women in Telangana Reduces Travel Burden: Telangana High Court Rejects Wife's Petition to Transfer Divorce Case    |     Mechanical Referrals Invalid: "Deputy Registrar Must Apply Judicial Mind: Allahabad HC Quashes Deputy Registrar's Order in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Election Dispute    |    

Appellants Failed to Prove The Genuineness/Existence Of The Will – Declared Null and Void: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement that may set a precedent in property dispute cases, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has declared an alleged Will dated 13.12.1973 as 'illegal and void'. The judgement was pronounced in the case of Narinder Singh @ Nidhan Singh and others versus Jasbir Singh and others, resolving a longstanding dispute over property inheritance.

The Court dismissed the Regular Second Appeal filed by the appellants, upholding the decisions of the lower courts, which had favored the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction. The appellants had contested the judgements and decrees dated 30.11.2015 by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mohali, and 17.11.2022 by the Additional District Judge, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali).

A critical point in the judgement was the Court's observation on the alleged Will. The Court noted, "The validity and genuineness of the alleged Will executed by Hardial Singh were central to the dispute. The appellants failed to prove the genuineness/existence of the Will, leading to the conclusion that the Will was illegal and void."

The property in question, located in village Tangori, was subject to a mutation of inheritance based on the disputed Will. The Court's decision not only declared the Will void but also deemed the subsequent transfers based on this Will as invalid.

Highlighting the application of the Limitation Act in such cases, the Court observed, "There is no limitation for a suit for declaration based on title, and the cause of action arises from the date of knowledge of the mutation."

This ruling emphasizes the burden of proof on the appellants, as they were unable to produce the original Will or credible secondary evidence. Consequently, their claims were dismissed.

High Court stated, "The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose for consideration," thereby resolving a complex property dispute and setting a significant legal precedent.

Date of Decision: 12 January 2024

Narinder Singh @ Nidhan Singh and others VS Jasbir Singh and others 

 

Similar News