RSA No.154 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA No.154 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.07.2009 Raghbir Singh ...Appellant VERSUS Satbir Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. J. K. Goel, Advocate for the appellant. *** AJAY TEWARI J. This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant for declaration that the decree suffered by his father was null and void on two grounds viz., that the property was ancestral and the said decree required compulsory registration. It is not disputed that earlier his father had also filed a similar suit on these very grounds. Learned counsel has framed following substantial questions of law:- “a) Whether or not the decree dated 22.09.92 is illegal null and void? b) Whether or not the petitioner has the ownership rights to the extent of half share in the disputed land in view of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act? c) Whether or not the courts below have mis-read and RSA No.154 of 2009 (O&M) -2- mis-interpreted the entire documentary evidence?” Both the courts below have considered these matters and had held the plaintiff-appellant to be disentitled to the relief on the ground that his father had challenged the said decree and both these issues had been found against him and the court had held that neither the property was ancestral nor was it hit by the vice of non-registration. Both the Courts have thus come to the conclusion that the previous decree was res-judicata. Learned counsel has argued that since he was not a party thus the dismissal of the earlier suit could not affect him. However, it is not denied that the claim made in both the suits was the same viz., whether the property was ancestral in the hands of Pirthi. In my opinion, findings thereon would definitely be res-judicata in the present case. Consequently, I hold the questions of law proposed against the appellant and dismiss the appeal. As the main case since has been disposed of therefore all the pending civil miscellaneous applications in the case also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) July 06, 2009 JUDGE ashish