VIJAY KUMAR BHAGWAT Vs. KANT AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal involves a peculiar situation where all the attesting witnesses of a registered Will had expired before they could be examined in the Trial Court.

(2.) THE facts in brief shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this appeal lie in a narrow compass. The appellant/plaintiff brought a suit (No. 165-A/94) in the Court of Second Civil Judge Class-I, Vidisha for declaration and possession in respect of suit house claiming its ownership on the basis of a registered Will dated 29-1-1957 (Ex. D-1) in favour of respondents alleged to have been executed by his father Laxman Rao as fake and false. He has also claimed mesne profit. It is alleged that respondents had occupied a portion of the suit house as a tenant of his father and, therefore, also claims mesne profit at the rate of 150a per month.

(3.) THE respondents-defendants had contested the suit on the ground that the house belonged to father of the appellant. However, since appellant never resided with his father and was carrying on business independently elsewhere while the respondents were living with the father of the appellant and had served him through out his life and, therefore, he had bequeathed the suit property in their favour by a registered Will dated 31-3-83 and since then they are occupying the house in their capacity as a full owner.