CIVIL REVISION NO. 4066 of 2007 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: MAY 08. 2008 Jagjit Kaur & others .....Petitioners VERSUS Surinder Singh & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr.Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.M.L.Saini, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 to 3. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Respondent-plaintiffs, claiming themselves to be owners in possession in equal shares of entire estate of Surjit Singh, filed a suit for declaration to this effect. Their claim is based on a registered Will dated 11.7.1985. They have also prayed for injunction for restraining the petitioners from transferring, alienating or creating any type of charge over the suit property and their forcible dispossession from the suit property. CIVIL REVISION NO. 4066 of 2007 :{ 2 }: Surjit Singh died on 10.12.1998. He was married to petitioner Jagjit Kaur in the year 1954. It is stated that their relations were not cordial and thus they started living separately. Surjit Singh was serving as a Patwari and he allegedly started living with Tara Devi, respondent No.5. It is averred that petitioner Jaswinder Kaur and Kamaljit Singh were born out of the wedlock of Surjit Singh and Jagjit Kaur, whereas plaintiffs Surinder Singh, Narinder Singh and Balwinder Singh were born out of the liaison of Surjit Singh with Tara Devi. Jagjit Kaur (petitioner) had also filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging that her husband Surjit Singh was having illicit relations with Tara Devi, out of which three children were born. The said petition was accepted and divorce granted but by mutual consent. It is claimed that the entire suit property was gifted by Tara Devi to Surjit Singh and Surjit Singh had executed a Will in favour of plaintiffs Surinder Singh, Narinder Singh and Balwinder Singh. They had accordingly filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 for seeking an ad-interim injunction restraining the petitioners from alienating the suit property during the pendency of the suit. The petitioners, who are defendants, filed a joint written statement objecting to the locus on the part of the respondents to file this suit. It is claimed that the respondents are sons of Janki Dass son of Ram Dass from Smt.Tara Devi, who is the wife of Janki Dass. It is further stated that Surjit Singh never treated Smt.Tara Devi as his wife. In support of this fact, the petitioners would draw attention to a statement made by Tara Devi in Civil Suit No.403 dated 19.12.1988 CIVIL REVISION NO. 4066 of 2007 :{ 3 }: where she had clearly stated that Janki Dass was her husband and they had settled at Anandpur Sahib. This fact is also statedly corroborated by the birth certificates of the respondents. The trial court dismissed the application filed by the respondents by relying upon the statement of Tara Devi. They filed an appeal against the same order and the Appellate Court has reversed the said finding and has restrained the petitioners, who are defendants, from alienating, transferring or creating any charge over the suit property till the disposal of the suit. The petitioners have, thus, filed this revision petition against this order. Respondents have preferred their claim by terming them to be sons of Surjit Singh through Tara Devi. They have heavily relied upon customary divorce between Surjit Singh and Jagjit Kaur to say that Surjit Singh had severed his alliance with Jagjit Kaur and was living with Tara Devi and thus the respondents, who were born out of this wedlock are his sons. It is to be noticed that this divorce petition was dismissed but the divorce thereafter was statedly obtained as per custom and mutual consent. The Appellate Court has relied upon a gift deed whereby the land was gifted by Tara Devi to Surjit Singh, but the statement made by Tara Devi in suit No.403 dated 19.12.1988 decided on 23.1.1996 cannot be completely ignored. She had clearly stated that name of her husband was Janki Dass. She had also stated that she was residing at Anandpur Sahib for the last 25/30 years and she had four children, out of which three are sons and one daughter. This admission by Tara Devi may not be binding on the respondents but CIVIL REVISION NO. 4066 of 2007 :{ 4 }: certainly is a very vital material for determining the status of the respondents. This could not have been ignored to pass any interim order in favour of the respondents. The birth certificates of the respondents were placed on record where they are shown sons of Janki Dass. Even if it is shown that Surjit Singh and Jagjit Kaur had divorced each other, it would not lead to mean that Surjit Singh had married Tara Devi. Simply because Surjit Singh was having relations with Tara Devi would not mean that respondents are his sons and prima-facie case is made out in their favour for grant of interim injunction. The evidence of Tara Devi is very material and cannot be ignored. This statement she made in suit instituted on 19.12.1988 and decided on 23.12.1996. This was apparently after execution of the Will on 11.7.1985. I am, thus, of the considered view that the lower Appellate Court has not exercised its discretion in a proper, legal and valid manner to reverse the order passed by the trial court while granting interim direction restraining the petitioners from alienating, transferring or creating any charge over the suit property. The order passed by the lower Appellate Court, impugned in the present revision petition, thus, cannot be sustained and the same is set-aside. The revision petition is accordingly allowed. May 08, 2008 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE