Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court

Ignoring Crucial Evidence is an Illegal Approach: P&H High Court in Remanding Ancestral Property Dispute for Fresh Appraisal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Additional evidence to determine the ancestral nature of disputed lands in Salala and Pattar Kalan villages.

In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court remanded an ancestral property dispute back to the lower appellate court, emphasizing the necessity of considering additional evidence. The case, involving the descendants of Dalip Singh and his land in Salala and Pattar Kalan, highlights the complexities of property inheritance and the importance of thorough judicial review.

The dispute traces its origins to a suit filed by Gurdev Singh and Sarwan Singh, sons of Dalip Singh, in 1985. They contested the ancestral nature of land in the villages of Salala and Pattar Kalan, which Dalip Singh allegedly favored his grandsons, the sons of his other sons, Lachhman Singh and Baldev Singh. The plaintiffs sought to invalidate a 1982 decree in favor of these grandsons, claiming their joint ownership of the property.

The central issue was whether the land was ancestral or self-acquired. Dalip Singh’s descendants were divided, with some arguing that the land was ancestral, inherited from his father Hakam Singh, while others maintained it was self-acquired. The trial court had previously ruled that the land in Pattar Kalan was ancestral, whereas the land in Salala was self-acquired based on a 1958 sale deed from Parmeshwari Devi to Dalip Singh.

Justice Deepak Gupta noted significant omissions by the lower courts, particularly the failure to address an application for additional evidence filed by the plaintiffs in 1987. This application aimed to introduce further documentation, including a claim application and allotment parchi, to clarify the nature of the land. The appellate court's oversight in not considering this application was deemed a critical flaw in the judicial process.

The judgment underscored the appellate court's duty to evaluate all pertinent evidence before reaching a decision. "The application for additional evidence, filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, was essential for a comprehensive understanding of the case. Ignoring this application constituted a lapse that necessitates a re-evaluation," the court stated.

Justice Deepak Gupta remarked, "Without deciding the application for additional evidence, the appeal's merits cannot be thoroughly assessed. The appellate court must consider this evidence to ensure a just resolution."

The remanding of this case highlights the judiciary's commitment to exhaustive evidence evaluation in property disputes. By directing the lower appellate court to reassess the case with the additional evidence, the High Court aims to ensure a fair determination of the land's ancestral status. This judgment is expected to reinforce the importance of meticulous evidence review in similar property disputes.

Case Title: Gurdev Singh (since deceased) through LRs and another vs. Lachhman Singh and others

 

 Date of Decision: May 31, 2024

Similar News