GURDEV SINGH Vs. MALA RAI KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE can be no doubt that the order Obtained from the Court at Kharar was procured by practicing deceit and fraud by the respondent, who was married to Sher Singh under Kareva cus tom. From that marriage, a child was born. In the Court at Kharar, permission was sought on behalf of the minor to sell the property without disclosing that the respondent wife had filed a similar and identical case at Sangrur before the Guardian Judge. The petition was filed in the Court at Sangrur on 7.4.2010 (P -6) and the petition in the Court at Kharar was filed on 28.7.2010 (P -10). The Court at Kharar under mistake of fact granted the permission. It was specifically pleaded in para. 10 at page 77 of the paperbook by Mala Rai Kaur "that no such petition has earlier been filed by the petitioner before this Court or any other court of law." The Court is informed that Mala Rai Kaur has abandoned the proceedings in the Court at Sangrur and is not traceable. This Court had vide order dated 9.9.2013 required the personal presence of the parties and they were directed to remain present in Court on 19.9.2013. Despite Orders, Mala Rai Kaur did not put in appearance which led to further orders being passed by this Court including of police help in the matter. On 16.12.2013, this Court was apprised by the learned State Counsel, on instructions from Head Constable Gurpartap Singh who was present in Court, that the whereabouts of respondents No. 1 and 2 have been found and they shall be produced in Court on the next date of shearing.

(2.) TODAY , Ms. Jasleen Sidhu, on instructions from HC Gurpartap Singh, states that the house taken on rent by Mala Rai Kaur was found locked by the police. Her where -abouts are not known any longer. She has withdrawn her ward from the school on 17.12.2013 and the police in the circumstances can only make further efforts to trace her out. The police is directed to continue with the search and to apprise this Court on affidavit filed in this case of the results even after this case stands disposed of. To do so in two months.

(3.) IN the totality of circumstances, this Court is left with no doubt that deceit was practiced on the Court at Kharar to obtain permission to sell the property making the child/ward a tool in the hands of Mala Rai Kaur and perhaps at the behest of the purchaser of the property from her in 2010.