Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 247 (UTT)

Jai Singh v. Ajai Singh

2016-06-13

SERVESH KUMAR GUPTA

body2016
JUDGMENT : 1. The challenge herein is to refusal for issuance of injunction by Fourth Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun, vide impugned judgment and order dated 06.02.2016. 2. The necessary facts, sans unnecessary details, are that Shri R.K.P.N. Singh (grandfather of plaintiff-appellant Shri Jai Singh) purchased some property in the name of his wife Smt. Chandrawati Singh. He had two sons, namely, Shri Jai Singh and Shri Vikram Singh. During the lifetime of Mr. Singh himself, a family partition took place among all the family members viz. Mr. Singh himself, his wife and two sons. 3. To give effect such family partition, (which virtually had happened on 14.01.1988), a legal colour an O.S. No.594 of 1992 was brought by all the members of Joint Hindu family, wherein, it was accepted by Mr. Singh that the property, wherefor, division was sought under the Suit, was a Joint Hindu Family property. Since, such Suit was only to rap the legal sanctity over the de facto partition, which had already occurred. Soon after, all the defendants filed their written statements and accepted the averments of the plaint. 4. With the result, decree and judgment was pronounced by the Court below on 24.02.1992 and thus, all the property, which, in fact, was purchased by Mr. Singh, though, in the name of his wife Smt. Chandrawati Singh, was partitioned under the Court decree. 5. Present plaintiff Mr. Jai Singh was born on 12.09.1979, thus, he was alive and running in the age of almost a boy of 13 to 14 years and he was not a party in such original suit. 6. After such partition, certain sale deeds were executed by Mr. Vikram Singh from the property, which fell into his share and one of such sale deeds, was executed in favour of Mr. G.S. Bansal and Smt. Alka Bansal. 7. When Shri Jai Singh attained the age of majority and became the youth of almost 25 to 26 years with the elite qualification decrees in law, he filed a Suit No.122 of 2005 for seeking partition of the property with a consequential relief of cancellation of the sale deed, which was executed by his father in favour of Mr. G.S. Bansal and Smt. Alka Bansal. Mr. Bansal appeared and presented his written statement. 8. However, Mr. G.S. Bansal and Smt. Alka Bansal. Mr. Bansal appeared and presented his written statement. 8. However, Mr. Jai Singh entered into a compromise with the defendants on 19.08.2010 accepting rupees six lakhs in lieu thereof, wherein, it was accepted under his signature that “this property was held by Smt. Rani Chandrawati Singh in the capacity of HUF, nominee of Shri R.K.P.N. Singh. This property was subsequently partitioned on 14.01.1988, which was ratified and confirmed by learned Civil Judge, Dehradun, in O.S. No.594 of 1992, “Shri R.K.P.N. Singh and others Vs. Smt. Chandrawati Singh and others”, vide judgment dated 24.12.1992. 9. Consequent to the partition, LOT-3, Block-1 fell in the share of Shri Vikram Singh and this property merged into the HUF comprising of Shri Vikram Singh, Smt. Sunita Singh, Shri Jai Singh and Ms. Neha Singh. The property, for which this agreement is being made, is situated at Mohini Road, Dehradun.” 10. The contention of learned counsel of the appellant that since Mr. Jai Singh was not the party in the O.S. No.594 of 1992, hence, any partition, among the members of the Joint Hindu Family, was not binding on him, is not, at all, acceptable and is rejected by this Court. The reason is that Mr. Jai Singh, by virtue of his birth, cannot acquire any independent interest in the property acquired by his grandfather during the lifetime of such grandfather. This property was not coming from ancestors but was, in fact, owned by Mr. R.K.P.N. Singh and partition took place during his lifetime among his wife, two sons and Mr. Singh himself, so whatever share of Mr. Jai Singh will acquire in the property will come from Shri Vikram Singh (his own father). 11. Further once, Shri Jai Singh accepted the partition decree dated 24.12.1992, in the compromise entered by him on 19.08.2010, then he is estopped from going behind his own acceptance. The property, in question, might be accepted as of the Joint Hindu Family among Shri R.K.P.N. Singh, Smt. Chandrawati Singh, Shri Jai Singh and Shri Vikram Singh. 12. Plaintiff Shri Jai Singh cannot attain any independent interest beyond the interest of his father. So, I feel that the issuance of injunction has rightly been refused by learned Civil Judge. This appeal has no force and it is hereby dismissed at the threshold.