GURNATH RANGNATH MALI Vs. ARUN NAGORAO POTDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by original defendant Nos.6 to 13 raising challenge to the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jr.Dn., Ausa in Regular Civil Suit No.27/78 decided on 15-3-1982 which decree has been confirmed in Regular Civil Appeal No.78/1982 decided by the District Judge, Latur on 29-11-1988.

(2.) Respondent/Original plaintiff instituted suit against his father, mother and purchaser of the property seeking declaration that he is owner of the suit property on the strength of the will-deed executed by his grand father Dinanath and for declaration to the effect that alienation made by defendant No.1 in favour of other defendants is not binding on him. Plaintiff further claims possession of the property alienated by defendant no.1, his father. According to plaintiff, property belonged to his grand father Dinanath. Dinanath during his life time had executed a will-deed bequeathing the property to plaintiff. His grand father Dinanath died in the year 1960. Plaintiff did not have knowledge of execution of will-deed by Dinanath and he gained knowledge in respect of execution of will-deed on 6-10-1976. Thereafter he proceeded to file suit seeking reliefs as stated above. It is the contention of plaintiff that his father - defendant No.1 had no authority to transfer the properties which were bequeathed in his favour by his grand father. Alienation made by his father does not bind his interest and as such is liable to be set aside.

(3.) Defendant no.1 - father of plaintiff inspite of service of summons remained absent and suit proceeded ex-parte against him. Defendant Nos.3 to 6 and defendant No.14 resisted the suit by filing written statement. Apart from denying the contentions raised by plaintiff in the suit, objection was raised in the written statement to the effect that claim is raised beyond prescribed period of limitation.