SMT. MEENA SHUKLA Vs. SMT. MEENA SAXENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anurag Shukla, for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and perused the record.

(2.) Briefly stated that the facts of the case giving rise to the present petition can be summarized as follows:-

(3.) Suraj Prasad Saxena was the owner in possession of house no. 122/137, Sarojini Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. Upon his death there appeared two sets of claim. One was by her daughter-in-law, namely, Smt. Savita Saxena, who claimed under a registered Will and the other was by his own daughter, namely, Smt. Meena Saxena (respondent no. 1). Savita Saxena allegedly executed a sale deed in favour of the petitioner.