- (1.) CM No. 8900-C of 2012 has been filed for placing on record application dated 27.07.2007 (Annexure P-2) and seeking exemption from filing its certified copy. Allowed as prayed for and application dated 27.07.2007 (Annexure P-2) is taken on record subject to all just exceptions. RSA No. 1009 of 2012 Plaintiff/appellant Harpal Singh is in second appeal against the concurrent findings returned by both the courts below, whereby his suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge(Jr.Divn.), Phillaur vide judgment and decree dated 26.11.2008 and the findings thereof have been affirmed in appeal by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide its judgment and decree dated 13.10.2011. In brief, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff/appellant (Harpal Singh) filed a suit for declaration that the land in dispute is joint Hindu family, coparcenary, ancestral property of plaintiff Harpal Singh and defendant no. 3 Jagtar Singh being brothers and, therefore, the entry of mutation no. 2692 entered on the basis of registered sale deed dated 12.06.2002 is null and void as the sale deed is without any consideration and against law. It was alleged that Chain Singh defendant no. 1 now deceased and being represented by his children was the father of plaintiff and defendant no. 3 Jagtar Singh. Chain Singh was insane since beginning of year 2000 and he was operated upon in a hospital and thereafter was getting regular treatment from various doctors. It was further alleged that the land in dispute came into the hands of Chain Singh-defendant no. 1 from his forefathers by way of inheritance step by step and Chain Singh was Karta of the family. Consequently, it was alleged that Chain Singh had a limited right to alienate the suit property and the same could be sold only for legal necessity. It was further alleged that the plaintiff/Harpal Singh who is residing abroad when came to know about mutation no. 2692 in February, 2003 when he came back which was recorded on the basis of sale deed in favour of Jiwan Kumar defendant no. 2 executed by defendant no. 1. Thus, it was alleged that this sale deed was a result of misrepresentation and fraud and, therefore, the sale deed be set aside.
(2.) Upon notice Baljinder Kaur, Lr of Chain Singh filed written statement, admitting the claim of the plaintiff Harpal Singh.
(3.) Jiwan Kumar, defendant no. 2 filed his written statement and alleged collusion between the family members and denied the suit land to be joint Hindu family ancestral coparcenary property. It was denied that Chain Singh defendant no. 1 was insane or that he was getting treatment from different doctors. He alleged that the sale deed dated 12.06.2002 validly executed for a sale consideration of Rs. 2.50 lac qua land measuring 02 kanals 10 marlas. Remaining averments were denied and prayer was made for dismissal of the suit.;