Ved parkash11/13/2022 ![]() At the time of allotment the plaintiffs were not even born. The family then comprised, besides Lal Dass, his wife, daughter and son i.e. The case of the defendant-respondent is that the land was allotted to his father, Lal Dass in the year 1949-50. The plaintiffs averred that the property had, in fact, already been partitioned under partition deed in the year 1973 and plaintiffs were accordingly in possession of their share in the property but the defendant in order to defeat their rights, executed the impugned deed of disinheritance which on the face of it is illegal.Ĥ. The defendant being head of the family came to acquire occupancy rights over the allotted land but every member of the family has inherited equal share in the property, and the defendant was not competent to divest the plaintiffs of their right and interest in the allotted land. The case of the plaintiffs-appellants is that they are displaced persons from Pakistan occupied area and the land was allotted to the family of the plaintiffs on per capita basis in pursuance of Cabinet Order no. The plaintiffs filed suit seeking declaration that the deed of disinheritance dated 18th November, 1985 executed by Punchi Ram, their father, as illegal, ineffective and inoperative, and permanent injunction restraining him from dislodging the plaintiffs from 2/6th of the property, including the house which is subject matter of suit.ģ. 10/1997 affirming the decision of the Subordinate Judge, Rajouri in civil suit no. This second appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Rajouri dated 30th January, 1999 in appeal no. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |