DAVINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner finds herself in an extremely unfortunate predicament on account of her being left alone with a minor child upon the death of all the other members of her immediate family and the passage of time which has resulted in the facts being blurred. In the facts and circumstances of the case we are inclined to draw a presumption in her favour, not merely because she would otherwise loose her only residential accommodation but on the balance of probabilities.

(2.) The flat was allotted to one Ms. Ajit Kaur Sethi on 27.12.1985. It was transferred to S.Jasbir Singh Kang and his wife Smt. Amarjit Kaur who are the petitioner's in-laws on 27.12.1985. Smt. Amarjit Kaur and Jasbir Singh Kang expired on 29.09.2000 and 08.01.2008 respectively leaving behind their sons Shivinder Singh who was the petitioner's husband and one Amarinder Singh. The petitioner married Shivinder Singh on 24.05.1997. Unfortunately, Amarinder Singh died on 14.11.1999 and petitioner's husband Shivinder Singh died on 29.10.2010.

(3.) On 05.10.2012 when the petitioner sought a transfer of the flat in her name, she was understandably shocked to learn that the plot has been purportedly resumed on 22.12.1993. We will presume that the resumption order was passed. The respondents contend that the resumption notice was pasted on the premises on 04.01.1994. It is a little difficult to believe this for had it actually been pasted on the premises, it would be unlikely that the members of the petitioner's family would have sat back and done nothing in the matter.