SHEETAL Vs. GUNWANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.L. Dharashive, learned Counsel for the appellant.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the land admeasuring 5 hectares 4 Ares at Chikalthana was owned by Babu Belkunde. Babu had four sons namely, Balwant, Gunwant, Shivaji and Tanaji. Appellant is the widow of deceased Tanaji. There was partition between Babu and his four sons, in which, Tanaji-husband of the appellant has received 0.81 Ares of land and Babu received 1 hectare 60 Ares of land. Other sons also received the land. It is not disputed that the appellant is in possession of this land admeasuring 0.81 Ares which Tanaji had received in partition between Babu and his four sons. Babu, during his life time, executed a Will in the year 2009 in respect of the land admeasuring 1 hectare 60 Ares, received by him in the partition between himself and his sons, in favour of respondents-original defendants.

(3.) Present appellant filed suit against the respondents claiming a declaration that the compromise decree passed in RCS No. 15/2012 be declared as null and void as well as a declaration that the Will was forged and fabricated. Insofar as the compromise decree in RCS No. 15/2012 is concerned, the trial Court has held that nothing turned on it as the same was filed by the widow of Babu claiming share in the property, which was fallen to the share of Babu, admeasuring 1 hectare 60 Ares, which was compromised and that has no bearing upon the claim made by the present appellant, for if the appellant had share in the property, which had fallen to the share of Babu, which was incapable of being bequeathed by him, then only she would have any right therein.