MOHINDER SINGH (D) Vs. MAL SINGH (D)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) More than half a century has passed since the suit was filed on 19/10/1971 by Mohinder Singh and Gurnam Singh, who are represented by their legal heirs as appellants before us for declaring that a gift deed executed by their brother, Gian Singh in favour of Pritam Kaur with respect to schedule properties 'A' and 'B' as mentioned in the head note of the plaint, is null and void and not binding on their rights being reversioners as also the rights of other reversioners of Gian Singh on his death. It was the case of the appellants that Gian Singh was governed by general customary law till the enforcement of the Hindu Succession Act and Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and the appellants were the nearest best legal heirs of Gian Singh. It was alleged that Gian Singh was issueless, without a wife, had no relationship with Pritam Kaur, the beneficiary of the gift deed and that Pritam Kaur daughter of Gurbax Singh was not the wife of Gian Singh. The appellants alleged later, as per facts set out hereinafter that Gian Singh was married to one Pritam Kaur daughter of Inder Singh who had pre-deceased him.

(2.) On the suit being filed, a common written statement was filed by Gian Singh and Pritam Kaur, affirming to the execution of the gift deed and Pritam Kaur being his wife. Gian Singh passed away on 24/1/1972 and thereafter the respondents sought to amend the plaint on 11/2/1972 seeking a decree of possession and for declaration of ownership of Schedule Property 'C as mentioned in the head note of the plaint.

(3.) The suit was dismissed by the judgment dtd. 3/11/1973 predicated on a reasoning that the Punjab Custom (Power to Contest) Amendment Act, 1973 applied to a pending proceeding according to which no decree could be passed declaring alienation of ancestral properties to be invalid. Consequently, the suit filed by Mohinder Singh and Gurnam Singh was dismissed. An appeal against this was dismissed by the District Judge, Patiala and in the second appeal the High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirmed the view vide its judgment dtd. 25/9/1975. The appellants then filed a special leave petition before this Court challenging the order of the High Court in which leave was granted and appeal was registered as Civil Appeal No.263 of 1976. This appeal was heard with a number of other matters dealing with the issue of the claim of such revisionary rights and has been decided in Darshan Singh Vs. Ram Pal Singh and Anr,(1992) Suppl.(1) SCC 191. The plea raised on reversion was rejected but in terms of operative paragraph 61 the matters were reverted back to be decided in accordance with Hindu Law.