BANT SINGH & ANR. versus NIRANJAN SINGH(D) BY LRS,& ANR.

BANT SINGH & ANR. versus NIRANJAN SINGH(D) BY LRS,& ANR.

The evidence of DW-1 and DW-2, having special knowledge of the family, was admissible under s.50 of the Evidence Act to prove the relationship of Nandi as daughter of Chartu. The High Court erred in rejecting this evidence. Since no substantial question of law was formulated as to whether the property was coparcenary, that issue could not be re-examined by the Supreme Court.

Parties
Appellant: Bant Singh; Appellant: Bachan Kaur; Respondent: Niranjan Singh (D) by LRs.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Property Dispute, Coparcenary Property, Inheritance by Heirs of Daughter, Admissibility of Evidence Under S.50 Evidence Act, Evidentiary Value of Revenue Records
Hindu Law Evidence Law Property Dispute Coparcenary Property Inheritance by Heirs of Daughter Admissibility of Evidence Under S.50 Evidence Act Evidentiary Value of Revenue Records

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bant Singh

Appellant

Bachan Kaur

Appellant

Niranjan Singh (D) by LRs.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the evidence led by the defendants conformed to s.50 of the Indian Evidence Act to prove relationship of Nandi as daughter of Chartu
  2. 2 Whether courts below relied on admissible evidence under s.50 of Evidence Act or misread evidence
  3. 3 Whether the suit property was coparcenary and whether Nandi could inherit

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of DW-1 and DW-2, having special knowledge of the family, was admissible under s.50 of the Evidence Act to prove the relationship of Nandi as daughter of Chartu. The High Court erred in rejecting this evidence. Since no substantial question of law was formulated as to whether the property was coparcenary, that issue could not be re-examined by the Supreme Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of High Court set aside; decree in favour of appellants restored; no order as to costs.