KHURSHIDA BANO Vs. MU.IMTIYAZ BEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff was admitted for hearing on 26.08.2020 on the following substantial question of law :

(2.) The suit property bearing Sheet No.56, Plot No.129/1 admeasuring area 420 sq. feet was originally held by one Noor Khan. He had two wives namely Chhote Bee and Begum Bee. After his death, the suit property was divided between his two wives. Each of them got equal share of the property. Chhote Bee got 210 sq feet of land bearing Khasra No.129/1, whereas Begum Bee got 210 sq feet of land bearing Khasra No.129/3.

(3.) The dispute in the suit property relates to 210 sq feet of land bearing Khasra No.129/1 held by Chhote Bee, which she gave on licence to the original defendant No.1 Bahadur Mohammad, who died during the pendency of the suit and his legal representatives have been arrayed as party respondents, for running betel shop. When she (Chhote Bee) demanded possession of the suit land, the defendant No.1 refused to give the vacant possession of the suit land, therefore, she instituted a suit for possession of the suit land stating interalia that she being the title holder, it was given to the original defendant No.1 Bahadur Mohammad on licence, but now he is not vacating the suit land despite requests. In the meanwhile, Chhote Bee died on 31.08.2002. On 21.07.1993, she had executed a WILL vide ExP/1 in favour of the present substituted appellant/plaintiff Khurshida Bano and 210 sq feet of land bearing Khasra No.129/1 was bequeathed in favour of Khurshida Bano. The appellant/plaintiff was substituted as legal representative of Chhote Bee in the civil suit on the strength of the said WILL and thereafter she prosecuted the suit. The defendants have disputed the averments in the plaint by filing written statement. By way of amendment, the defendant No.1 also pleaded that on the basis of WILL, no title has been conferred to the present appellant/ plaintiff. According to the defendants, in the WILL dated 21.07.1993 (Ex P/1), the suit land is not included and therefore the substituted plaintiff herein has no right/title over the suit land and the suit be dismissed.