REWA RAM Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHORN of unnecessary details the plaintiff petitioner has claimed Bhumidhari and Sirdari plot of one Nathu Lal, being adopted son, as well as placing reliance upon the Will dated 2-12-1966 alleged to have been executed by aforesaid Nathu Lal. The plaintiff petitioner is the son of a brother-in-law of Nathu Lal.

(2.) THE contesting defendant Ram Sahai has denied the claim of the plaintiff petitioner and has asserted that he being daughter's son of Nathu Lai, is entitled to the property belonging to aforesaid Nathu Lal. He has also placed reliance on the Wills alleged to have been executed by Nathu Lal on 20-2-1966 as well as on 3-1-1967. Other legal pleas have been raised by the defendant contesting opposite party as is evident from the issues framed in the seven suits filed by the plaintiff- petitioner.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the contesting opposite party has tried to support the impugned judgment of the second appellate court. He has emphasized that the will relied upon by the plaintiff-petitioner was written in Urdu and that neither the attesting witnesses nor the executant of the will knew Urdu script, therefore, the document was not proved and the first two courts had illegally accepted that document in evidence, therefore, the second appellate court was fully justified in disturbing the judgment of the first two courts.