GURDEV SINGH versus GURNAM SINGH & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

GURDEV SINGH v. GURNAM SINGH & Anr - FAO-5615-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 5 (3 January 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

F.A.O. NO. 5615 of 2005 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION: January 20, 2006.

Parties Name

Gurdev Singh

...APPELLANT

VERSUS

Gurnam Singh and another

...RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. R.S. Ghuman,

Advocate, for the appellant.

JUDGMENT:

This judgment will dispose of this appeal and connected F.A.O. No.5616 of 2005 as property in dispute is the same. For facility of reference, facts are being taken from FAO No. 5615 of 2005.

Respondent No. 1 (applicant) filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for grant of succession certificate for realisation of debts due to late Shri Ajit Singh son of Dalip Singh. Upon notice in that application, Gurdev Kaur (predecessor-in- interest of the appellant) put in appearance and claimed succession certificate in preference to respondent No. 1. Trial Court granted application of respondent No. 1 and ordered issuance of succession certificate in his favour. Both the Courts below, on appraisal of evidence on record, have noticed that Shri Ajit Singh died issueless and unmarried leaving behind no class I heir. Claim to his property was made by respondent No. 1 being his close relation. As against this, property of the deceased was claimed by predecessor-in-interest of the appellant by stating that she being widow of Kartar Singh, who was real brother of deceased Ajit Singh, was entitled to inherit the said property. It has come on record that husband of Gurdev Kaur had pre-deceased said Shri Ajit Singh and furthermore, he was also not real brother of deceased , who was the only son of Dalip Singh. By taking note of provisions of Sections 8 and 12 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, both the Courts below found it as a matter of fact that respondent No. 1 was agnate of Ajit Singh deceased and as such as per law, he had a preferential right to inherit his property in comparison to predecessor-in-interest of the appellant. Nothing has been shown to the contrary to this Court, which may necessitate any interference in pure findings of fact. Consequently, both the appeals are dismissed.

January 20, 2006. ( Jasbir Singh )

DKC Judge

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.