IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101 RSA-722-2018 Date of Decision: 05.04.2025 ASHU AND OTHERS …..Pe))oner Vs. FAIMAN (DECEASED) THROUGH HER LRS AND OTHERS …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. ****** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Defendants of the case are before this Court against the concurrent findings of the Courts below. Suit for declara#on with consequen#al relief of permanent injunc#on filed by plain#ff-Faiman (respondent No.1 herein through her LRs) was decreed by the trial Court on 13.02.2015. The appeal filed by the contes#ng defendant Nos. 1 to 8 (appellants herein) was dismissed by the First Appellate Court on 08.05.2017. Assailing the aforesaid concurrent findings, it is contended by learned counsel that by virtue of muta#on bearing No.1188 dated 28.06.2006, the defendants had become owners of the suit land and that plain#ff brought the suit, by asser#ng her right in the suit property on 03.03.2010 and suit was barred by limita#on. There is no merit in the conten#on. On perusal of the paper book, it is found that suit property belonged to Ismail @ Islam. Plain#ff-Faiman, and proforma defendant No.9 PRIYANKA 2025.04.05 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-722-2018 -2- Majidan and Ujiri were the daughters of Ismail @ Islam. As Ujiri had expired so her children have been impleaded as proforma defendant Nos. 10 to 15. Plain#ff claimed suit property on the basis of natural succession of Ismail in her favour and in favour of proforma defendants. Defendants simply relied upon a muta#on bearing No.1188 dated 26.06.2006 in their favour. The Courts below have rightly held that plain#ff and proforma defendants are the direct descendents of Ismail, so they had inherited the suit property. The defendants could not convince the Court as to how they are related to Ismail @ Islam and on what basis, muta#on bearing No.1188 dated 26.06.2006 was sanc#oned in their favour. The defendants could not even produce evidence regarding any custom so to ignore the daughters amongst the Meo’s in succession to the property of their father. Since the suit is based upon #tle, so the limita#on could not be a bar to seek #tle to the suit property. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court does not find any merit in the appeal. As such, the same is hereby dismissed. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) 05.04.2025 JUDGE pry Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No PRIYANKA 2025.04.05 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document