Shukar Jan vs Bashir S — 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Shukar Jan VS Bashir S.147---Private partition---Scope---Children of son of the propositus---Share of their deceased father, entitlement to---Scope---Whether the plaintiffs/appellants, being children of deceased son of predecessor, were entitled to get a share from the property of predecessor or not?---Though it is not disputed that predecessor-in-interest partitioned his property amongst his four sons but the private partition of his legacy was not confirmed as was required by S.147 of Land Revenue Act, 1967, thus it had got no legal sanctity---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case Shukar Jan VS Bashir S.42---Decree for declaration---Scope---Improvement on the suit-land---Suit of the plaintiffs was concurrently dismissed---Validity---Since the defendants had not claimed possession from the plaintiffs, hence the question of improvements by the plaintiffs in the suit land was irrelevant and if the defendants claimed possession of the land from the plaintiffs then the plaintiffs could claim improvement but merely on the basis of improvements, the plaintiffs could not be declared as the owners of the suit land, hence a decree for declaration could not be passed in their favour---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case Shukar Jan VS Bashir S. 100---Question of facts, determination of---Second appeal---Maintainability---Suit filed by the plaintiffs was concurrently dismissed---Validity---Only question of facts were involved in the present second appeal which had concurrently been decided by both the Courts below---Concurrent findings of facts cannot be reversed in the second appeal unless some apparent misreading, non-reading of evidence has been spotted by the appellant or flagrant violation of any statutory law has been committed by the Courts below---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case Shukar Jan VS Bashir Children of son of the propositus---Share of their deceased father, entitlement to---Scope---Whether the plaintiffs/appellants, being children of deceased son of predecessor, were entitled to get a share from the property of predecessor or not?---Though one of the defendants admitted the claim of the plaintiffs but the Courts below had rightly observed that if said defendant had accepted the claim of the plaintiffs they might transfer the suit land in their names from him through any recognized mode and merely on the basis of admission of said defendant the plaintiffs could not be declared owners of the land---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case Shukar Jan VS Bashir S. 1(2) [as amended vide Transfer of Property (Amendment) Act, 2021]---Children of son of the propositus---Share of their deceased father, entitlement to---Retrospective effect---Scope---Though an amendment has been effected in Transfer of Property Act, 1982 vide Transfer of Property (Amendment) Act, 2021 qua the children of son of the propositus being declared entitled to get the share of their deceased father but the said Amendment has not been given a retrospective effect rather it has been blatantly mentioned in S.1 subsection (2) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, that it shall come into force at once, hence said amendment is also not helpful to the plaintiffs/appellants---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case Shukar Jan VS Bashir Children of son of the propositus---Share of their deceased father, entitlement to---Whether the plaintiffs/appellants, being children of deceased son of predecessor, were entitled to get a share from the property of their predecessor or not?---Admittedly, the predecessor-in-interest had four sons and it is also not denied by the plaintiffs that their father (son of predecessor) died in the lifetime of predecessor, hence after the death of the predecessor, the mutation was attested in favour of three sons, as father of plaintiffs died in the lifetime of his father, hence the plaintiffs cannot claim a share from his(predecessor's) inheritance---No misreading and non-reading of evidence or violation of any settled law had been noticed in the impugned judgments passed by both the Courts below---Second appeal filed by plaintiffs, being merit-less, was dismissed, in circumstance.

Shukar Jan vs Bashir S — 2025 MLD 309 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD