GURJIT SINGH Vs. MEHAR SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of RSA # 3278 of 2015 titled Gurjit Singh vs. Mehar Singh and RSA # 3331 of 2015 titled Gurjit Singh vs. Mehar Singh and others. The facts are taken from RSA # 3278 of 2015 as by and large common questions of law and fact are involved in both the appeals arising out of two suits, one filed by the father against the son and the other vice versa. Both the suits have been dismissed against which the losing party has approached this Court in second appeal against the appellate decrees.

(2.) PLAINTIFF Mehar Singh is the father of defendant Gurjit Singh. The plaintiff has been living and working for gain in Dubai for the last 30 years. Mehar Singh owns property in India including the disputed house # 1663, Phase -5, SAS Nagar, Mohali. The plaintiff pleaded that his litigating son was separated from his wife and thereafter in July 2002 was permitted by him to reside temporarily as a licensee in one room with bathroom with use of back yard on the ground floor of the suit property. The defendant promised to vacate the premises soon after making his own arrangements. But he reneged on his promise and refused to vacate the premises. This led to the litigation with father asking son to quit.

(3.) UPON notice, defendant appeared and filed his written statement. He denied that plaintiff was exclusive owner in possession of the suit premises. When he was 12 or 13 years old he was taken to Dubai in the year 1986. He studied there for 3 years and thereafter took to work as a carpenter to make a living. He used to earn money and make it over to his father. The defendant worked there till the year 2001 and claims that he gave lacs of rupees to this father and also sent some money from his savings to his mother in India. The defendant asserted that the construction of the ground floor of the suit house was funded by him. The two upper storeys were also constructed and let out to tenants on rent. Defendant was married in September 2001. Defendant stated that soon after he was married his mother Surinder Kaur, sister and brother started harassing his wife for bringing insufficient dowry. This led to matrimonial discord and matters came to a head when the wife moved an application to the State Commission for Women, Chandigarh and in the Women Cell of the Police Department, Sector -17, Chandigarh complaining of harassment etc. A mutual settlement was arrived at in the parleys to restore peace. It was decided that a portion of the house should be allocated to the defendant for separate residence and the defendant should become owner of half share in all the properties as he had contributed an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/ - for the construction of the house in dispute. It was also decided in the Women Cell that the two upper storeys of the suit house would be given to the defendant after the tenants have vacated the rented premises. The alleged family settlement took place in the year 2002.