CHHOTE KHAN DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS SON, HARMAT, AND OTHERS versus MAL KHAN AND OTHERS.

CHHOTE KHAN DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS SON, HARMAT, AND OTHERS versus MAL KHAN AND OTHERS.

The prohibition on partition, stemming from settlement agreements registered in the Wajib-ul-arz, ceased upon expiry of the settlement period. The contesting defendants are co-owners entitled by law to seek partition. The current settlement entries do not bind without consent, and prior agreements have no perpetual...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Chhote Khan, deceased, represented by his son Harmat and others; Respondent: Mal Khan and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 April 1954
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Decree of the High Court at Lahore, Arising Out of the Judgment and Decree of the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer and Assistant Collector, First Grade as Senior Sub Judge, Gurgaon.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Partition, Wajib Ul Arz, Settlement, Co Ownership, Adverse Possession
Property Law Partition Wajib Ul Arz Settlement Co Ownership Adverse Possession

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chhote Khan, deceased, represented by his son Harmat and others

Appellant

Mal Khan and others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Decree of the High Court at Lahore, Arising Out of the Judgment and Decree of the Extra Assistant Settlement Officer and Assistant Collector, First Grade as Senior Sub Judge, Gurgaon.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an entry regarding agreement in Wajib-ul-arz survives the period of settlement and operates as a bar to partition
  2. 2 Whether the descendants of Dalmir and other branches are full owners in equal shares, entitled to partition
  3. 3 Whether the prohibition of partition in the settlement agreement continues after expiry of the settlement period

Ratio Decidendi

The prohibition on partition, stemming from settlement agreements registered in the Wajib-ul-arz, ceased upon expiry of the settlement period. The contesting defendants are co-owners entitled by law to seek partition. The current settlement entries do not bind without consent, and prior agreements have no perpetual effect.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal is dismissed with costs.