IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 2784 of 2007 Date of decision : April 27, 2009 Hanuman Appellant Versus Darkali and Others Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants Mr. Jaswant Jain, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 3 A.N. JINDAL, J. (ORAL) The appellant has set up the case that he being the adopted son of Darkali, respondent No. 1 wife of Sultan is the co- sharer to the extent of 1/6th share in the suit land measuring 87 kanals 10 marlas situated in village Chhapra Bibipur, Teshil Narnaul. He has alleged that after death of Sultan, respondents have got the mutation of inheritance incorporated only in their names regarding 1/6 share of Sultan in the suit property, whereas, suit property being ancestral, he should have been recorded to be owner to the extent of 5/48 share and respondents should have been recorded to be owners to the extent of 1/48 share each in the suit property. The suit was contested and both the Courts below and both the Courts decided the pleas against the appellant. The contentions raised by the counsel for the parties have been heard and record perused. R.S.A. No. 2784 of 2007 2 It transpires that though respondent No. 2 had entered into compromise with the appellant and transferred her share in his favour in the suit land but the release deed No. 1309 dated 16.1.2002 stands in his way which deprives him of his right. This release deed indicates that respondent No. 2 and Darkali had already transferred their share in the suit land in favour of Bhoorli. As such Darkali, who was no more owner of any part of the suit property at the time of entering into compromise could not transfer the same in favour of the appellant by way of a compromise. The release deed has not been challenged by the appellants by way of the present suit. No substantial questions of law arises in the case. Dismissed. (A.N.JINDAL) 27.04.2009 JUDGE reena