HARDIP SINGH Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts are that Assa Singh was the owner of the property in dispute. He had adopted the appellant as his son. By a registered gift deed dated 12.10.1965, he conveyed the property in favour of respondents No. 1 to 4. This gift deed was challenged by the appellant and the said suit was decreed by holding that the transaction would not affect reversionary rights of the appellant since the land was held to be ancestral and coparcenary. Appeal against the said judgment was also dismissed on 15.11.1972. Subsequently, respondents No. 1 to 4 re-conveyed the property in favour of Assa Singh by way of gift deed dated 26.11.1973. Shortly thereafter, i.e on 19.12.1973 Assa Singh conveyed the property in favour of respondents No. 5 to 9 by way of registered sale deed. The appellant filed the present suit seeking possession of the land in dispute on the basis of reversionary decree in his favour and further challenged the re-conveyance in favour of Assa Singh by gift deed dated 26.11.1973 and the subsequent sale deed made by him dated 19.12.1973 on the ground that not only were they sham and bogus transactions but also that the sale was without consideration and legal necessity. The respondents denied these assertions.

(2.) THE learned trial Court held that the subsequent transfers were made only to defeat the rights of the appellant and also that the gift deed and the sale deed were both sham and bogus transactions. The trial Court also held that the sale deed executed by Assa Singh at the age of 90 selling his entire property was not for legal necessity. However, the trial Court held that the appellant and Assa Singh were governed by customary law and, thus, the appellant was not entitled to seek possession on the basis of reversionary decree after abrogation of custom in Punjab. Consequently, even while holding all the transactions to be in valid, the trial Court dismissed the suit.

(3.) THE following questions have been proposed:-