LexBARA SINGH versus KASHMIRA SINGH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
BARA SINGH v. KASHMIRA SINGH AND ORS. SEPTEMBER 12, 1990 [T.K. THOMMEN, K.N. SAIKIA AND N.M. KASLIWAL, JJ.] Hindu Law-Ancestral Immovable property-Alienation a/- Custom amongst lats in Central District of Punjab-Alienation as a bona fide act of good management-Valid. Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 sold their 3/Sth share of the ancestral land to the appellant for Rs.14,000, as the vendors left their village and wanted to settle elsewhere where they purchased 80 kanals of Nehri land. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 filed a declaratory snit in the court of Snb-J udge, Ludhiana seeking a declaration that the sale of the suit land would not affect their reversionary rights after the death of respondents 4 to 6. They pleaded that the land was ancestral and according to the custom governing the parties, it could not be alienated; they also asserted that the land was sold without any consideration and legal necessity. The appellant defendant No. 1, contended that the sale was an act of good management on the part of the alienors, and that the same was not without consideration/the vendors liaving decided to settle elsewhere. The trial court held that the sale was an act of prudent manage- ment and was not without consideration. As regards the cnstom it held that the · parties were governed by custom, whereunder ancestral land could not be alienated except for legal necessity or as an act of good management. The suit was accordingly dismissed and the first appeal preferred against that decision failed. Respondents 1 to 3 thereafter preferred Regular Second Appeal before the High Court. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the sale holding that it was neither for any legal necessity nor could it be justified as an act of good management. The suit was accordingly decreed. Hence this appeal by the appellant-defendant No. 1 by special leave. 417 A B c D E F G H A B c D E F G H 418 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] Supp. 1 S.C.R. Before this Court the appellant contended that the sale was or was not an act of good management having been a question of fact, the trial court as also the rrrst appellate court having arrived at a concurrent finding that it was an act of good management, the High Court should not have interfered with that rmding. On the other hand the respon- dents contended that the sale was not an act of good management. Allowing the appeal, this Court, HELD: The custom is that the ancestral immovable property is ordinarily inalienable specially amongst Jats residing in the Central Districts of Punjab, except for necessity and the other permissible reasons. All alienation as a bona fide act of good management has been treated as one of necessity and hence valid. [233B I In the instant case, the vendee proved the ingredients of good management and the concurrent rmding of the Trial Court and the first appellate court was that the impugned sale was an act of good manage- ment, and it was essentially a finding of fact. [234F] The High Court was, therefore, in error in setting aside the con- current f'mding of fact in the facts and circumstances of.the case in Second Appeal. Gujar v. Sham Das, 107 P.R. 1887; Mohammad Chiragh and Ors. v. Fatta & Ors., AIR 1934 Lahore 452; Abdul Rafi Khan v. P. Lakshmi Chand and Ors., AIR 1934 Lahore 998; Dial Singh v. Surain Singh, AIR 1937 Lahore 493; Gujjan Singh and Ors. v. Atma Singh, 1968 PLR Vol. 70-195. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1934 of 1972. From the Judgment and Order dated 9.12.1971 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in regular Second Appeal No. 1286of1969. V.C. Mahajan, K.R. Nagaraja (NP) and R.S. Hegde for the Appellant. ·· BARA SINGH v. KASHMIRA SINGH [SAJKIA.J.} 419 Uma Dutta, E.C. Agarwala, Ms. Sheil Sethi and Susheel.Kumar A for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.N. SAIKIA, J. This first defendant's appeal by special leave B is from the Judgment and Decree of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in R.S.A. No. 1286 of 1969 dated 9.12.1971. Respondents 4 to 6 Balwant Singh, Jagir Singh and Teja Singh, sons of Kehar Singh sold land measuring 38 Kana ls 3 Mar las, being 3/5th share of 63 Kanals 11 Marlas of ancestral land situated at village Maherna Kalan, Tehsil and District Ludhiana, as per sale deed dated June 4, 1964 in favour of the appellant (first defendant) for Rs.14,000 as the vendors left their C village Maherna Kalan and had not been cultiv
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.