LATA @ LALITA BAI Vs. SHRIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants/Original plaintiffs have filed this second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC against the judgment and decree passed on 27.04.2011 by First Additional District Judge, Betul in Regular Civil Appeal No. 17-A/2007, whereby the judgment and decree passed on 31.07.2007 by the Additional Judge to the Court of Civil Judge Class-I, Bhainsdehi, District Betul in C.S. No.3-A/2004 dismissing the suit filed by the appellants for declaring a will executed by Kishni Bai in her lifetime on 12.10.1999 in favour of respondent/defendant No.1 Shriram to be void and for declaring their 1/3rd share in the disputed house has been affirmed.

(2.) Admittedly, late Kishni Bai was the owner of the disputed house situated in ward No. 10 of village Bhainsdehi, whose present house No. is 173. late Sahablal, respondent No.1 Shriram and respondent No.2 Shankar were sons of the Kishni Bai and Kishni Bai had died on 15.12.2000 and his sons Sahablal had expired on 24.03.2001 and appellant No. 1 Lata @ Lalita Bai is the widowed wife of the Sahablal and other appellants are their children.

(3.) Appellants/Plaintiffs have filed the suit on the pleadings that previously Kishni Bai was living with her younger son Sahablal and Kishni Bai had executed a will on 05.09.1995 in favour of the Sahaball to give the disputed house to the Sahablal after her death. Thereafter, Sahablal fell ill due to his kidney ailment and he was taken to Maharashtra for treatment and operation and in the meanwhile, Kishni Bai was also suffered from paralysis and unable to walking and speaking. Appellant No. 1 took her husband to Maharashtra and then respondent No.1 Shriram took Kishni Bai for her service but respondent No.1 never kept Kishni Bai with him and respondent No.1 had obtained the will from Kishni Bai from 12th of October, 1999 in relation to the disputed house, but on that date Kishni Bai was serious and unable to walk and hear.