DEEPAK KUMAR THAWAIT Vs. RISHI KUMAR THAWAIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal preferred by the appellant/plaintiff was admitted for hearing by formulating the following two substantial questions of law:-

(2.) The suit property was originally held by Ramadhin. He died leaving his widow Ramkali Bai and three sons namely, Ratanlal, Rishi Kumar and Pawan Kumar. The plaintiff is son of Ratanlal, whereas Rishi Kumar and Pawan Kumar are defendants No.1 and 2. Defendant No.3 is wife of defendant No.2-Pawan Kumar. Ramkali Bai, wife of Ramadhin, executed a registered Will on 13.2.2003 in favour of the plaintiff bequeathing the suit property in his favour and subsequently she died on 4.6.2003. Thereafter, on 3.3.2004 the plaintiff filed a suit for eviction, mandatory injunction and damages against the defendants herein stating interalia that deceased Ramkali Bai has executed a registered Will in his favour on 13.2.2003 vide Ex.P-1 and become title-holder of the suit property and as such, he has given the suit house to defendants No.1 and 2 on license for staying in the suit house for few months, but they are not vacating the suit house despite several requests and therefore, decree for mandatory injunction directing their eviction and consequential relief of damages also be passed against them.

(3.) Resisting the suit, defendants No.2 and 3 filed their written statement and denied the averments made in the plaint stating inter-alia that taking advantage of ill-health of Ramkali Bai, the plaintiff got the Will executed in his favour. It was further pleaded that the suit property has been partitioned and on partition it came in their share and they are staying in the suit accommodation as title-holders, as such, the suit deserves to be dismissed.