JAGWINDER SINGH ALIAS JOGINDER SINGH vs RAMANDEEP KHIMAREET KAUR AND OTHERS — RSA/2630/2025

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 12th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 01-Aug-2025

CNR: PHHC010146622025

Filing Number

RSA/5400/2025

Filing Date

27-Jan-2025

Registration No

RSA/2630/2025

Registration Date

30-Jul-2025

Judge

Mr. Justice Vikram Aggarwal

Coram

Mr. Justice Vikram Aggarwal

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

12-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAGWINDER SINGH ALIAS JOGINDER SINGH

    Adv. S S GREWAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAMANDEEP KHIMAREET KAUR AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Vikram AggarwalView PDF

    Summary: RSA No. 2630/2025 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Jagwinder Singh's second appeal, upholding the trial and appellate courts' decrees in favor of Ramandeep Khimareet Kaur. The court found the disputed Will dated 23.02.1984 was not validly proved due to multiple suspicious circumstances: Gursewak Singh was only 32 years old when executing it, the 4-year-old beneficiary could not have provided the "services" mentioned, the original document disappeared, and it was registered after the testator's death. The propounder failed to satisfactorily explain these red flags, so the plaintiff's claim as legal heir to the property was decreed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/2630/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: RSA No. 2630/2025 Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed Jagwinder Singh's second appeal, upholding the trial and appellate courts' decrees in favor of Ramandeep Khimareet Kaur. The court found the disputed Will dated 23.02.1984 was not validly proved due to multiple suspicious circumstances: Gursewak Singh was only 32 years old when executing it, the 4-year-old beneficiary could not have provided the "services" mentioned, the original document disappeared, and it was registered after the testator's death. The propounder failed to satisfactorily explain these red flags, so the plaintiff's claim as legal heir to the property was decreed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case