Date of Decision: 3.3.2014 Vs. Geeta Devi and Others

Date of Decision: 3.3.2014 vs Geeta Devi and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Mar 03, 2014

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1131623

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1131623
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Mar 03, 2014
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Date of Decision: 3.3.2014

Respondent

Geeta Devi and Others

Excerpt

.....of an attested copy of the registered will khan md.firoz 2014.03.06 10:08 from the proper quarters which would be limited to the effect that the will i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court chandigarh cr no.1511 of 2014 :2: exists, although its contents cannot be looked into on the well known principles relating to proof of will. it is also not known whether the witnesses are dead or alive. these are hurdles in the way of the petitioner. in the circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application with a limited prayer that he may yet place on record the attested copy of the registered will dated 11.11.1966 for any other ancillary or incidental purpose relating to an existence of fact, not fact-in-issue regarding nature and character of the suit property. to that limited extent, the petitioner is given liberty. in case such an application is filed, the trial court will decide the same in accordance with law without being influenced by anything said in this order since this order does no more than to give the limited opportunity of presenting the application before the trial court for its consideration in its discretion to be exercised on legal principles in deciding the same, if presented. this petition is dismissed with the aforesaid limited liberty. (rajiv narain raina) judge33.2014 mfk khan md.firoz 2014.03.06 10:08 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court chandigarh

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1511 of 2014 Date of Decision: 3.3.2014 Naresh Kumar Garg ....Petitioner Versus Geeta Devi and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present : Mr.Sumit Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner 1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

(Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the plaintiff was misadvised to file an application for leading additional evidence under Section 151 of the CPC, more so at the stage of rebuttal evidence.

He submits that the right couRs.to be adopted was to summon a clerk from the Office of the Sub Registrar for production of a copy of registered will dated 11.11.1966 executed by Ghasi Ram in favour of Ram Parkash, nephew.

Ghasi Ram died issueless.

Though the petitioner/plaintiff has been unable to prove the will in accordance with the provisions of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for lack of resorting to proper mode of proof, but he prays that he may be permitted to lead evidence on the basis of production of an attested copy of the registered will Khan Md.Firoz 2014.03.06 10:08 from the proper quarters which would be limited to the effect that the will I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court chandigarh CR No.1511 of 2014 :2: exists, although its contents cannot be looked into on the well known principles relating to proof of will.

It is also not known whether the witnesses are dead or alive.

These are hurdles in the way of the petitioner.

In the circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application with a limited prayer that he may yet place on record the attested copy of the registered will dated 11.11.1966 for any other ancillary or incidental purpose relating to an existence of fact, not fact-in-issue regarding nature and character of the suit property.

To that limited extent, the petitioner is given liberty.

In case such an application is filed, the trial court will decide the same in accordance with law without being influenced by anything said in this order since this order does no more than to give the limited opportunity of presenting the application before the trial court for its consideration in its discretion to be exercised on legal principles in deciding the same, if presented.

This petition is dismissed with the aforesaid limited liberty.

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE33.2014 MFK Khan Md.Firoz 2014.03.06 10:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document punjab and haryana high court chandigarh

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2014 Same Parties Date of Decision: 3.3.2014 vs Geeta Devi and Others Same Subject Land Acquisition