NARENDRA BAHADUR Vs. BIRENDER BAHADUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals arise out of the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 166 of 2003 on the file of the XI Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to, as arrayed in the suit. The sole plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 are the sons of late Raj Bahadur and Smt. Ahilya Bahadur. The plaintiff is the third among the brothers. He filed the suit for the relief of partition and separate possession of Schedule-I, admeasuring 81 sq. yards, and Schedule-II, admeasuring 1026 sq. yards into four equal shares and allotment of one share each to him and the defendants. He has also prayed for the relief of declaration to the effect that the gift deed, dated 10-11-1999, registered before the Senior Sub-Registrar, Gulbarga, by their mother, Ahilya Bahadur, in favour of the 3rd defendant, their youngest brother is illegal, fraudulent and null and void, and for appointment of a Commissioner to partition the properties by metes and bounds.

(2.) He pleaded that their mother was the absolute owner of property in Schedule-I, being premises in Door No. 4-8-300, at Gowliguda, Hyderabad, comprised of ground + first floors, in an area of 81 sq. yards; and Schedule-II, comprising of two premises i.e. house Nos. 2-247 and 2-248, at Jagat Locality, Main Road, Opposite Town Hall, Gulbarga, Karnataka State, in an area of 1026 sq. yards with structures therein.

(3.) It was pleaded that their mother died on 23-03-2003 and before her death, she executed a Will, on 17-05-2002, bequeathing the property in Schedule-II in equal shares to all the sons. He stated that the 3rd defendant brought into existence, a gift deed, dated 10-11-1999, through fraudulent means, in respect of part of Schedule-II, i.e. premises bearing No. 2-247, and that the same is not valid in law, and nor does it give rise to any rights in favour of the 3rd defendant. It was also mentioned that the improbability of the execution of the gift deed by their mother is evident from the fact that, their mother had the habit of noting down the important events in her life book, and the execution of the gift is not mentioned therein. Other relevant facts were also pleaded.