SURINDER KAUR Vs. KAMALDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs second appeal challenging the judgments and decrees of the Courts below where his suit for declaration to the effect that she is owner in possession of the suit land with consequential relief of permanent injunction has been dismissed. As per the pleadings, defendant No. 2 -Vir Singh was owner in possession of 1/4th share of total land measuring 178 Kanals 1 Maria as detailed in the headnote of the suit. The said land was Joint Hindu Family Coparcenary property, which has devolved upon defendant No. 2 -Vir Singh from his grandfather. Appellant along with defendants Nos. 2 and 3 (Vir Singh son of Kala Singh and Harwinder Singh son of Vir Singh) formed Joint Hindu Family coparcenary property. Defendant No. 1 (now respondent), who is a clever person, in connivance with defendant No. 3 got executed a gift deed on 13.9.2004 from defendant No. 2 and transferred the entire ancestral property in favour of respondent -defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 2 was not competent to gift the entire ancestral coparcenary joint Hindu family property. The gift deed is illegal, null and void and not binding upon the rights of the plaintiff -appellant and, thus, declaration was prayed for grant of a decree that appellant was owner of 1/12th share of land measuring 178 Kanals 1 Maria and the gift deed dated 13.9.2004 executed by defendant No. 2 in favour of defendant No. 1 was illegal, null and void with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondent from alienating/encumbering the land in dispute in any manner.

(2.) UPON notice, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 filed a joint written statement raising various preliminary objections, submitting that the appellant have become a member in the Joint Hindu Family coparcenary property vide amendment of the Hindu Succession Act (Amended Act 2005) whereas the alleged gift deed was executed on 8.9.2004, whereas, Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, as amended, does not invalidate any alienation of the property made prior to 20.12.2004. Thus, the plaintiff had no right to challenge the gift deed in. hand. It was also claimed that Vir Singh -defendant No. 2 was absolute owner of the suit property which was his self -acquired property and was never a Joint Hindu Family property. The gift deed was executed by Vir Singh -defendant No. 2 out of love and affection, in lieu of services rendered by the respondent qua defendant No. 2 and his wife and, thus, dismissal of the suit was prayed for.

(3.) SEPARATE replications were filed to the written statements of the defendants.