R.S.A.No.3284 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.3284 of 2009 Date of Decision : 10.09.2009 Ajmer Singh ...Appellant Versus Sikander Singh etc. ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. S.K.Chawla, Advocate, for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Defendant No.1 is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the suit for declaration that the plaintiffs are owner of suit property on the basis of sale deed dated 12.6.1970, was decreed. It is the case of the defendant-appellant that such sale deed is result of fraud and misrepresentation. Both the Courts have recorded a concurrent finding of fact that there is no evidence of fraud and misrepresentation. Consequently, the suit for declaration that the plaintiffs are owners of the suit property on the basis of sale deed, was decreed. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that Jalour Singh, one of the co-vendee with Gurbachan Singh-plaintiff, has died on 11.10.1995. His estate is being claimed by Ruldu Singh on the basis of Will dated 7.8.1995. However, no evidence has been led to support the Will, therefore, the suit could not have been decreed. R.S.A.No.3284 of 2009 2 The argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is misconceived. The plaintiffs have sought declaration of their title on the basis of sale deed dated 12.6.1970 on the ground that Ajmer Singh has sold the property in favour of plaintiff No.1 and Jalour Singh, predecessor-in-interest of plaintiff No.2. Such declaration could be claimed by even one of the co-owners. Ruldu Singh is none else, but son of Jalour Singh and, thus, succeeds to the share of Jalour Singh by natural succession as well. Therefore, as one of the legal heirs of the estate of Jalour Singh, he is again competent to sue for the estate of Jalour Singh. The rights of the appellant are not dependent upon the execution or non- execution of the Will executed by Jalour Singh. Thus, the finding recorded by the Courts below that the sale deed executed by him does not suffer from fraud or misrepresentation, cannot be said to be incorrect and erroneous in any manner. In view of the above, I do not find that any substantial question of law arises for consideration of this Court in second appeal. Dismissed. 10.09.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE