RAMESH CHANDER Vs. RAJENDER PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No question of law much less a substantial question of law arises for consideration in the instant second appeal. Needless to state, petitioner impleaded as a defendant in the suit filed by the respondent has suffered concurrent findings of fact against him.

(2.) Respondent, Rajinder Prasad is the brother of the petitioner. He filed a suit for possession, mesne profits and permanent injunction claiming right to the suit property under a will dated 25.10.1988 purportedly executed by the father of the parties. In the written statement petitioner impleaded as defendant took the plea that the will was invalid on account of the fact that lease hold tenure in the land in question was demised in favour of the father of the parties by L and DO and the lease contained a prohibition that the lessee could not transfer the lease-hold tenure without the prior permission of the lessor. A plea was taken that other siblings had to be impleaded as parties to the suit.

(3.) Following issues were framed:-