R.S.A.No.853 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A.No.853 of 2008 Date of Decision : 16.09.2009 Ajaib Singh ...Appellant Versus Surjit Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Anant Kataria, Advocate, for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby suit for declaration challenging the sale deed dated 17.1.1996 executed by his mother-defendant No.2 in favour of defendant No.1, was dismissed. The challenge to the said sale deed was that the property was a Joint Hindu Family property, therefore, defendant No.2 could not sell the same and that such sale is without consideration and legal necessity. In written statement, the stand of the defendants was that the property is not a Joint Hindu Family property and that defendant No.2 as owner of the suit land was competent to sell the same. Both the Courts have recorded concurrent finding of fact that the plaintiff has failed to establish his locus standi to challenge the sale deed. There is no evidence that the property in the hands of defendant No.2 was a Joint Hindu Family property. In the absence of any such evidence, the plaintiff cannot have any locus standi to challenge the sale deed. Still further, the property in the hands of female member cannot be R.S.A.No.853 of 2008 2 said to be a co-parcenary property in respect of which the plaintiff could claim declaration that such sale is without legal necessity and consideration. The reasoning given by the Courts below cannot be said to be suffering from any patent illegality or irregularity, which may give rise to any substantial question of law for consideration of this Court in second appeal. Dismissed. 16.09.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE