Pawan Kumar Deceased Thr His Legal Heirs v. Inderjit & Others

RSA No.2610 of 2017 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.2610 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision.01.05.2019 Pawan Kumar (since deceased) through LRs ...Appellant Vs Inderjit and others ..Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Rahul Rampal, Advocate for the appellant.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) C.M. No.6460-C of 2017 For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 21 days in re-filing of the appeal is condoned.

Application is allowed.

Main case The short point involved in the present case is whether suit of the appellant-plaintiff for partition and declaration qua ownership of property with consequential relief of permanent injunction was liable to be decreed in toto, for want of partial partition.

The admitted case of the plaintiff was that one of the properties was orally partitioned and therefore, no such claim was laid. The revenue record reflected jointness of the properties. In such circumstances, even record revealed factual position and rightly so preliminary decree has been declined and finding the plaintiff to be in possession, defendants have been injuncted from forcibly dispossessing the plaintiff except in due course of law. PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.05.03 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA No.2610 of 2017 (O&M) -2As regards declaration with regard to one of the properties, there was assertion of the plaintiff qua transfer by the father in favour of another son but the plaintiff could not prove the oral family partition.

The appeal is also accompanied by an application for condonation of delay of 52 days in filing of the appeal. The explanation lacks reasonable cause and bona fide. In view of such circumstances, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the concurrent finding of fact 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 both on the ground of delay as well as on merits.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE May 01, 2019 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.05.03 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document