DARSHAN KAUR Vs. MEHAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge whereby the appeal was accepted thereby decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs.

(2.) BRIEFLY put, one Balaka Singh was owner of the property which was inherited by Hardit Singh and on his death by Josha Singh. Josha Singh had four sons, namely Mohinder Singh, Mehal Singh, Moola Singh and Kabul Singh. Mohinder Singh predeceased Josha Singh leaving behind Smt. Mejo widow and Darshan Kaur daughter (the present appellants). Baldev Singh, Gurdev Singh and Jaimal Singh are the sons of Mehal Singh, Avtar Singh is the son of Moola Singh and Swaran Singh and Bachittar Singh are sons of Kabul Singh. All these persons are plaintiffs.

(3.) UPON notice, both the defendants appeared and filed written statement. They denied the material averments made in the plaint. According to the case set up by the defendants, the land measuring 289 kanals 2 Marlas was originally owned by Hardit Singh s/o Bulaka Singh from whom Josha Singh inherited the property and so Josha Singh along with his four sons became entitled to the same i.e. 1/5th share each. It is in recognition of this right that defendant No. 1 was put in possession of the property (as Mohinder Singh had already died). The defendants also set up a plea of adverse possession. She further made averment to the effect that she is full owner of the property and so competent to deal with as she likes. Tamleeknama was stated to be a void document having been prepared in collusion with the scribe and the witnesses to defeat the rights of the defendants. It was further stated that defendant No. 1 has already sold the land vide sale deed dated 5.1.1987 to defendant No. 2 for consideration of Rs. 21,000/ -. This way she is a bona fide purchaser in good faith for consideration without any notice of any Tamleeknama and as such protected Under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act.