Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JATAN & OTHERS versus SMT. DHANPATI & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Jatan & Others v. Smt. Dhanpati & Others - SECOND APPEAL No. 3033 of 1980 [2006] RD-AH 18021 (19 October 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 30.

Second Appeal No. 3033 of 1980

Jatan (since deceased, died during the

pendency of suit  and others     ...   Plaintiffs-respondents

Vs.  

Smt. Dhanpati and others.      ...    Defendants-respondents.            

Hon. Sunil Ambwani, J.

Heard Sri Radhey Shyam for the petitioner.  No one appears for the respondents.

This second appeal arises out of the Original Suit No. 596 of 1979 filed by plaintiff-appellants for cancellation of sale deed dated 11.10.1967 executed by Smt. Piyari the defendant no. 3 in favour of defendants 1 and 2.  The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 30.5.1989.  The civil appeal no. 249 of 1978 was partly allowed on 31.7.1980, declaring that Smt. Piyari, the defendant no. 3, who was widow of Faujdar,  had 1/8 share in the land.  She, therefore, could not have sold 1/6 share and thus the sale deed dated 11.10.1968 to the extent of 1/4th share was cancelled.

Sri Radhey Shyam learned counsel for the appellant submits that both the courts below have wrongly disbelieved the documents electoral roll entry; the copy of the death register, and kutumb register showing that Smt. Piyari was wife of                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Shri Asharfi before she married Shri Faujdar.  He submits that as the co-tenure holder the plaintiff continued to be in joint possession and had got the land by survivor-ship under section 175 of the U.P. Zamindari and Land Reforms Act, 1950.

Both the courts have concurrently held that Smt. Piyari was wife of Shri Faujdar.  The documents filed in evidence were prepared during the period when the suit was filed.   The

2

evidence of DW-5, the daughter of Smt. Piyari and DW-1, the son in law of Smt. Piyari, established that she was the  wife of Shri Faujdar and had inherited 1/8th share in the land in suit.

With regard to transfer of sirdari land, the appellate court rightly held that the transfer could only the challenged by the Gaon Sabha and not a co-tenure holder.   The sale would be voidable only at  the instance of Goan Sabha.  The co-tenure holder shall  not get any right under section 175 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Holdings Act, 1950, as such the  right would be inherited by the co-tenants by survivorship only on the death of the other tenure holder.

I do not find that  the judgment of the court below raise any question of law, much less a substantial question of law to be decided by the Court

The second appeal and the cross objections are consequently dismissed with costs.

Dt. 19.10.2006.

BM/-


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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.