Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Property Inherited After 1956 Becomes Self-Acquired; Dismisses Suit Challenging Father’s Sale Deeds

Case Name: Amarjit Singh & Others vs. Rattan Singh & Others
Date of Judgment: 27 October 2025
Citation: RSA-1556-1994
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virinder Aggarwal

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that agricultural land inherited by Rattan Singh from his father, Chanan Singh, after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, devolved by succession under Section 8 and therefore became his self-acquired property. The Court held that the plaintiffs, being his sons, had no coparcenary or birthright in such property and could not challenge the sale deeds executed by him.

Summary: The appellants sought joint possession of 217 kanals of land, claiming it was ancestral coparcenary property. They challenged three sale deeds executed by their father, asserting absence of legal necessity. The Trial Court had partially accepted their case, but the First Appellate Court reversed the decree.

The High Court conducted a detailed exposition of Hindu succession law post-1956, distinguishing between pre-Act devolution by survivorship and post-Act devolution by succession. Since Chanan Singh died in the 1960s leaving behind a widow and daughter both Class I heirs the proviso to Section 6 applied, triggering succession under Section 8. Consequently, each heir took the property as a tenant-in-common, and the share that devolved upon Rattan Singh became his separate and absolute property.

The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s authoritative rulings in Chander Sen, Yudhishter, and Uttam, holding that once property devolves under Section 8, it loses its ancestral character and does not create coparcenary rights in the next generation. The Court also rejected reliance on Arshnoor Singh and Vineeta Sharma, explaining that both relate to situations materially different from a post-1956 statutory succession.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of the First Appellate Court, confirming that the suit land was the self-acquired property of Rattan Singh. As absolute owner, he was legally competent to execute the sale deeds, and the plaintiffs had no right to challenge the transactions. The Court’s ruling definitively settled that the ancestral character of property cannot survive when succession opens after 1956 in the presence of Class I female heirs.