LAL CHAND Vs. RAJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was plaintiff and has come in second appeal against judgment and decree dated 8.2.2000 passed by learned District Judge, Hamirpur in Civil Appeal No. 115 of 1991, reversing judgment, decree dated 31.8.1991, passed by learned Sub Judge, 1st Class (II), Hamirpur in case No. 82 of 1985-17 of 1987.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that appellant had filed a suit against Gian Chand and Ram Rakha, both having died during the litigation and now represented by their legal representatives. The appellant had challenged gift deed dated 16.5.1979 executed by Ram Rakha in favour of Gian Chand regarding property more specifically described in the plaint. The gift was challenged on the ground that it was without legal necessity and contrary to agricultural custom of the parties and therefore not binding on the appellant. The Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes property covered by the gift was ancestral and therefore gift was not binding on the reversioner. The parties are Ghirth by caste and depend on agriculture for their livelihood and governed by agricultural custom being residents of District Hamirpur which was earlier part of erstwhile District Kangra. According to agricultural custom applicable to the parties no person can dispose of the property without consent of the reversioner. Gian Chand got the gift deed executed by playing fraud with Ram Rakha.

(3.) The suit was contested by Gian Chand in which he took several preliminary objections such as locus standi, limitation, and collusiveness. It has been stated that parties are not collaterals nor the suit land is ancestral. It has been denied that the parties are governed by agricultural custom, rather parties are governed by Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Gian Chand had rendered service to Ram Rakha, an issueless person. In lieu of service rendered by Gian Chand to Ram Rakha he had executed a gift deed in favour of Gian Chand. In fact Ram Rakha had filed earlier suit for challenging the gift which was dismissed.