RANGANATH Vs. SAROJADEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's regular second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 01.12.2011 made in RA No. 51/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Koppal, confirming the judgment and decree dated 07.09.2011 made in OS No. 2/2010 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppal, dismissing the suit for declaration and injunction.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction, contending that the plaintiff is the brother and defendant is his sister. The father of the plaintiff and defendant by name Hanamanthappa died in the year 1986. The mother of the plaintiff by name Girijadevi died on 25.02.2003. The said Hanamanthappa and Girijadevi were having four sons and three daughters. Among the children, brothers and sisters of the plaintiff by name Venkatesh and Suvarna are also dead and it is pleaded that all the brothers and sisters of the plaintiff are Government servants. According to the plaintiff, the suit schedule property, originally belonged to his mother Ginjadevi and after the death of the father, the mother was in the care and custody of the plaintiff. He was looking after her, in her olden days till her death. Hence, out of love and affection, Ginjadevi had executed a valid Will dated 22.03.2000 bequeathing the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. Therefore, he succeeded to the suit schedule property and became the owner by virtue of the Will. The further case of the plaintiff is that the defendant also concocted a forged Will dated 01.12.2002 and in furtherance, she has denied his right, title over the suit schedule property. The grievance of the plaintiff is that the defendant in collusion with the revenue officials got entered her name in the mutation register in respect of the suit schedule property and thereafter, she has denied the right, title and possession of the plaintiff over the suit property. Therefore, he filed the suit for declaration.

(3.) The defendant filed written statement and admitted the plaint description and genealogy and also admitted that the suit schedule property belongs to their mother Ginjadevi and denied that her mother Ginjadevi was in care and custody of the plaintiff and denied that, out of love and affection executing a Will in favour of the plaintiff and it is the specific case of the defendant that her mother executed valid Will dated 01.12.2002 bequeathing the suit schedule property in her favour. At the time of execution of the Will, Girijadevi was in a sound and disposing state of mind. The plaintiff has neglected and refused to maintain his mother and hence, she was residing with the defendant at Gadag. In the mutation proceedings, the present plaintiff entered appearance and filed objections claiming intestate succession. But, he has not made any reference regarding execution of the Will by his deceased mother in his favour, etc. The suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by limitation. Therefore, she sought for dismissal of the suit.