Hari Ram And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

RSA No.2721 of 2016 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.2721 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision.06.02.2019 Hari Ram and another ...Appellants Vs The State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the appellants.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) C.M. No.7292-C of 2016 For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 64 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.

Application is allowed.

RSA No.2721 of 2016 The appellants-plaintiffs have not been successful in claiming declaration and mandatory injunction directing the defendants to enter the mutation in pursuance of the sale deed dated 24.10.1994 before the trial Court and as well as the lower Appellate Court.

The short point involved in the case is whether in the absence of ownership of the vendor, such direction could have been granted with intervention of the Court, the answer would be 'no'. It is settled law that a person, who is holder of a registered document and other party is denying his ownership, onus is heavily laid upon him to prove that his vendors or their previous vendors had right and title. In the absence of the same, direction as sought for along with PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.02.08 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA No.2721 of 2016 (O&M) -2declaration has rightly been rejected.

In view of aforementioned facts, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the judgments and decrees rendered by the Courts below, much less, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court. No ground for interference is made out. Resultantly, the second appeal is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE February 06, 2019 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.02.08 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document