CHARAN KAUR AND ORS vs AMARJIT SINGH AND AORS — RSA/3981/2007

Case under No Acts Defined. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 04th August 2016.

Case disposed Next hearing 14-Dec-2007

CNR: PHHC010815152007

Filing Number

RSA/3981/2007

Filing Date

11-Dec-2007

Registration No

RSA/3981/2007

Registration Date

12-Dec-2007

Judge

Mr. Justice Arun Monga

Coram

Mr. Justice Arun Monga

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

CIVIL II(RSA) BRANCH

Decision Date

04-Aug-2016

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 28-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

No Acts Defined

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHARAN KAUR AND ORS

    Adv. SANJEEV PATIYAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMARJIT SINGH AND AORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-Aug-2016

    Mr. Justice Amit RawalView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed two second appeals, finding that respondent-plaintiff failed to prove the death of Milkha Singh through adequate evidence—relying on self-serving statements and an autopsy report of a different person rather than corroborating documentation. The court held the property was self-acquired (not ancestral) and the registered sale deed executed by Milkha Singh's wife under power of attorney was valid, dismissing plaintiff's claim for 1/6th share of the estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Aug-2016

    Mr. Justice Arun Monga

  4. 29-Apr-2016

    Mr. Justice Jitendra Chauhan

  5. 29-Apr-2016

    Mr. Justice Mahavir Singh Chauhan

  6. 30-Nov-2015

    Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan

  7. 10-Aug-2015

    Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh

  8. 10-Aug-2015

    Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan

  9. 17-Mar-2015

    Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina

  10. 17-Mar-2015

    Mr. Justice Darshan Singh

  11. 11-Dec-2014

    Mr. Justice Arun Palli

  12. 11-Dec-2014

    Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih

  13. 26-Aug-2014

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

  14. 26-Aug-2014

    Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

  15. 26-May-2014

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

  16. 26-May-2014

    Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath

  17. 18-Feb-2014

    Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath

  18. 19-Sep-2013

    Mr Justice Jaswant Singh

  19. 19-Sep-2013

    Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh

  20. 23-Apr-2013

    Mr Justice Jaswant Singh

  21. 23-Apr-2013

    Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh

  22. 11-Dec-2012

    Mr. Justice M.M.S. Bedi

  23. 04-Dec-2012

    Mr Justice Jaswant Singh

  24. 04-Dec-2012

    Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh

  25. 06-Aug-2012

    Mr Justice Jaswant Singh

  26. 06-Aug-2012

    Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh

  27. 02-May-2012

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

  28. 25-Jan-2012

    Mr Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg

  29. 03-Nov-2011

    Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg

  30. 15-Sep-2011

    Mr. Justice M.M.S. Bedi

  31. 18-May-2011

    Mr. Justice Krishna Murari

  32. 04-Feb-2011

    Mr. Justice Krishna Murari

  33. 18-Nov-2010

    Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

  34. 12-Aug-2010

    Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

  35. 04-Aug-2010

    Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

  36. 01-Apr-2010

    Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

  37. 21-Dec-2009

    Mr. Justice S.J. Vazifdar

  38. 22-Sep-2009

    Mr. Justice S.J. Vazifdar

  39. 06-Jul-2009

    Mr. Justice S.J. Vazifdar

  40. 19-Mar-2009

    Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta

  41. 23-Dec-2008

    Mr. Justice Nawab Singh

  42. 12-Sep-2008

    Mr. Justice Nawab Singh

  43. 04-Jul-2008

    Mr. Justice Surya Kant

  44. 24-Mar-2008

    Mr. Justice Surya Kant

  45. 14-Dec-2007

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  46. 11-Dec-2007

    Case filed

    Registration No. RSA/3981/2007

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed two second appeals, finding that respondent-plaintiff failed to prove the death of Milkha Singh through adequate evidence—relying on self-serving statements and an autopsy report of a different person rather than corroborating documentation. The court held the property was self-acquired (not ancestral) and the registered sale deed executed by Milkha Singh's wife under power of attorney was valid, dismissing plaintiff's claim for 1/6th share of the estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case