SWARAN KAUR Vs. SARABJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SWARAN Kaur -appellant -defendant has directed the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 12.08.2014 passed by Shri Balwant Singh, learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court (Adhoc), Jalandhar vide which the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 09.10.2012 passed by Shri G.S. Sekhon, learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar decreeing the suit of the plaintiff -respondent, was dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts of the present case are that Sarabjit Kaur filed suit before the trial Court for decree of declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is joint owner in possession of 1/2 share of the southern side of the residential house situated at Sodal Road, Jalandhar as detailed in the head note of plaint and half share in residential house situated at village Ball, Tehsil and District Jalandhar as detailed in the head note of the plaint and further plaintiff is owner of 1/12 share of the land measuring 88 kanals 13 marlas as detailed in the head note of the plaint and suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating by way of sale, gift, lease, mortgage or in any manner.

(3.) ON notice, defendant appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections that plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit. Plaintiff has no relation with the defendant and she is not entitled for any property detailed in the head note of the plaint. Suit is bad for misjoinder and nonjoinder of necessary parties and suit is barred as per Section 34 of Specific Relief Act. Plaintiff is not in possession of any part of the property in dispute and no suit for declaration is made out as per law. Suit is not maintainable and plaintiff has no cause of action to file the suit. Suit of the plaintiff is barred by his own acts, conduct and omission. It is further alleged that plaintiff has not come to the Court with clean hands and concealed the material facts from the court. There is no oral settlement or memorandum of any settlement ever took place between plaintiff or husband of defendant. Defendant and her husband have not any child, Bhawikhan Singh died issue -less and his all property was inherited by defendant on the basis of registered Will dated 28.04.2003. The mutation has been sanctioned in favour of the defendant. The alleged memorandum of family settlement is neither registered nor stamped as per law and is not readable in evidence. On merits, defendant denied all other averments and prayed for dismissal of the suit.