MS. CHANCHAL KAUR Vs. SH. SUJAN SINGH JATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 1.9.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala in Civil Appeal No. 156 -P/XIII of 1999 whereby the appeal filed by the present appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff') was dismissed and judgment and decree dated 11.10.1999 passed by the Sub Judge, 1st Class (II), Palampur was upheld.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendant'). In this suit, it was alleged that the plaintiff's father vide agreement dated 25.12.1960, executed by the defendant, purchased 1/3rd share of the house consisting of one room in the Abadi and whole share in the land owned by the defendant for a consideration of Rs. 1000/ -. The defendant had allegedly received a sum of Rs. 400/ - at the time of execution of the agreement and the balance amount was to be paid within two years. It was alleged that the balance amount was paid on 19.1.1963.

(3.) THE defendant contested the suit and pleaded that the plaintiff was only a co -sharer in the suit property but is not in possession of the house and the land. He denied the execution of the agreement or the receipt of any consideration. The case set up by him was that when he (defendant) initiated partition proceedings, the plaintiff filed the present suit with the intention of delaying the same. Both the Courts below have come to the conclusion that the agreement, in question, and the receipt have not been proved in accordance with law. The learned Courts below also come to the conclusion that the transfer of the property could not have been made without a registered deed. They have also come to the conclusion that the plaintiff has miserably failed to prove that she has become owner by way of adverse possession.