HARBANS LAL Vs. STATE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant had sought probate in respect of Will of 9th January, 2006. As per the aforesaid Will, appellant becomes the owner of entire immovable property i.e. House No.8/136, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi.

(2.) Trial court while relying upon the aforesaid Will has proceeded to take into consideration the Compromise of 23rd March, 1997 arrived at between the parties in the suit bearing No.75/76 titled Sukh Devi and Another v. Krishan Lal. It is noted in the impugned order that as per the abovesaid Compromise Krishan Lal, predecessor in interest of appellant, his mother and his step-brother were to be the joint owners of the property in question in equal shares. It is not disputed that after the aforesaid Compromise of 23rd March, 1997, mother of aforesaid Krishan Lal had died and so, while relying up the aforesaid Compromise of 23rd March, 1997, trial court vide impugned order has granted probate of the Will in question to the extent of 50% of the property in question in favour of appellant.

(3.) At the hearing, learned counsel for appellant assails the impugned order on the ground that as per the aforesaid Compromise, the share of appellant was 50% and after the death of his mother his share would come to 62.5 % and trial court has misread the aforesaid Compromise to deny the share of 62.5 % to appellant in the property in question.