LexTEG SINGH AND OTHERS versus CHARAN SINGH AND ANOTHER
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
• • TEG SINGH AND OTHERS v. CHARAN SINGH AND ANOTHER March 23, 1977 365 [Y. V. CHANDRACl!UD, P. K. GOSWAMI AND P. N. StrJNGHAL JJ.J A (i) Punjab Customs (Power tq contest) Act, 1920 S. 7 as amended by s. 3 B of the Punjab Custon1s (Power to contest) Anzendm-ent Act (Act 12) 1973- G'onstruction and effect of-(ii) Punjab Lin1itation (Custoni) Act, 1 of 1920, S. 8 scope of. S. 7 of the Punjab Customs (Power to Contest) Act, 1920 provided that no person shall contest any alienation of non-ancestral immovable property on the ground that such alienation is contrary to custom. S. 3 of the· Amendment Act 12 of 1973 amended s. 7 with the result that no challenge could be made to the alienation of any immovable property, whether ancestral or non-ancestral, on the ground that it is contrary to custom. C A gift"1.eed was executed by one Mula, in favour of appellant No. 13 Bhag- \Vati Devi, on De<:ember 3, 1964. Appellants 1 to 12 claiming to 'be potential reversioners obtained a decree on May 31, 1966 in a suit filed against the donor and the donee· for a declaration that under the Punjab Customs (Power lo Contest) Act z, of 1920 the gift-deed was not binding on .them and that decree was confirmed in appeal on October 16, !967. On July 10, 1966, Mula acto,,ted the respondent. On March 11, 1970 appellant No. 13 executed in favour of appellants 1 to 12,, a lease in respect of the property which was the D subject matter of the gift. Mula died on August 23, 1971. On December 13, 1971, respondent filed a suit for possesion of certain propert.ies including the property which Mula had gifted to appellant No. 13. The suit was decreed on January 20, 1971 and that decree was confirmed in appeal by the District Court and the High Court; In appeal by special leave, the appellants contended (i) In decreeing the suit the Courts below had over~looked the, relevant provisions of the Punjab Customs (Power to Contest) Amendment Act, 1973 by virtue of which the legality of the gift made by Mula to appellant No. 13 could not be contested E and (ii) since the respondent was not entitled to impeach the gift in favour of Bhagwati Devi, having been adopted after the date of the gift, the decree obtained by appellants 1 to 12 cannot enure for his benefit, under s. 8 of the Pun'jab Limitation (Custom) Act, of 1920. Dismissing the appeal, the Court- HELD : ( 1) That a declaratory decree obtained under the Punjab C'ustoms (Power to Contest) Act by a reversioner to the effect that an alienation would not bind them after the alienor's death, had the effect of restoring the property F alienated to the estate of the aliener and therefore, all persons who are heirs to the dece\sed were entitled to obtain possession of the alienated property. [367 E-FJ (ii) The decree obtained by appellants I to 12 on May 31, 1966 would enure for the benefit of all persons who are. entitled to a share i'n the property of the deceased as it existeQ at the_ moment of his death. Since Mula's property stood freed from the encumbrance of the gift at the moment of his death, res- pondent as the adopted son would be entiled to the possession Of the gifted G properly. [367 H, 368-A] Giani Ram v. Ramii Lal (1969) 3 SCR 944, relied on to; Chand Singh v. lad Kanr (1974) I PLR 226 approved. (iii) It is true that, if it became necessary after the amending Act of 1973 to contest the gift executed by Mula in favour of Bhagwati Devi, s. 7 of the Act of 1920 would operate as a bar to such a contest. But in the instant case, the basis on which the respondent has asked for the relief is that upon the death of Mula in 1971, the gift ceased to be operative by reason of the decree pas<e.d in suit No. 14311965. He has not and indeed he need not have contested the va1iditv of the gift-deed since the question was decided finally in the aforesaid suit. [367 B-DJ · · H 366 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1977] 3 S.C.R. A CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 686 of 1976. B c D E F G H (Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated 13-2-1976 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in R.S. A No. 249 of 1976). P. P. Juneja, for the appellants. S. K. Mehta, K. R. Nagaraja and P. N. Puri, for respondent No. 1 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRACHUD, J. (1) One Mula executed a registered gift deed in favour cif appellant No. 13, Bhagwati Devi, on December 3, 1964. On April 29, 1965, appellants l
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.