P&H: Rejects Plea Of Oral Family Settlement And “Partial Partition”; Restores Trial Decree Granting Partition

punjab-haryana
⚖️ Order Date: 18 May 2026
Headnotes

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, S.158(2) — Partition of joint property — Jurisdiction — Absence of any evidence to prove existence of joint gair-mumkin land among parties, suit can not be held to be bad for partial partition - Even appellant admitted that land was...

Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, S.158(2) — Partition of joint property — Plea of oral family settlement by defendants - Proponent of oral family settlement has to discharge the burden of proving the family settlement - No evidence on record to prove settlement - Occupation...


Facts of the Case

P&H: Rejects Plea Of Oral Family Settlement And “Partial Partition”; Restores Trial Decree Granting Partition

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed two second appeals and restored a trial court decree directing partition of a joint residential property, setting aside the lower appellate court’s dismissal.

The dispute concerns property that originally belonged to Jora Singh and later fell to the share of his son Ami Lal. Daya Ram, claiming a 1/16th share as a co‑sharer, sought partition by metes and bounds and separate possession. While the trial court decreed the suit, the lower appellate court reversed it, accepting the defendants’ objections that the suit was a “partial partition” and that the property had already...

Login required to open full judgment PDF
Login to Access File