KUNDAN SINGH Vs. JASVINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In substance, only two grounds have been urged by counsel for the apellant. First, that the trial court has failed to appreciate the contention of his client that the property was purchased by his late father from one Shri Chandan Singh in the name of the respondent, who happens to be his sister, merely as a benami, and therefore, he was entitled to his proportionate share by partition of that property on the death of his father. Second, that the respondent had no money to pay for the property and nothing is proved to show that she did in fact pay for it.

(2.) Admittedly, not a single document has been proved on the record which shows Shri Chandan Singh as the previous owner who sold the property to the respondent. At best, in some of the documents, which have been proved, Chandan Singh has been shown as one of the witnesses to the documents, which in any case, have been executed in favour of the respondent.

(3.) Further, even the receipt allegedly executed acknowledging the final installment of the sale price for the property received by him from the parties' late father Shri Jaswant Singh, in the presence of one Mast Ram on 26.01.1997, mentioned in his affidavit by way of evidence by Chandan Singh, has also not been proved by the appellant in any manner.