IMRATI Vs. MOHARLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgments and decrees dated 20.9.2007 and 3.3.2009 passed respectively by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narnaul (hereinafter described as `the trial Court') and the Additional District Judge, Narnaul (referred to hereinafter as `the first appellate Court') whereby the suit of the plaintiff- respondent no.1 was decreed and the appeal of the defendant-appellant, Smt.Imrati, and defendant-proforma respondent no.2, Raghbir, was dismissed.

(2.) Respondent no.1 had filed a suit for declaration against the appellant and proforma respondent no.2 pleading therein that she had inherited the estate of Ganga Sahai after his death on 26.4.2003 being his widow; that in this way, she became owner in possession of the suit land and mutation dated 20.6.2003 was sanctioned in that regard; that the appellant and proforma respondent had an evil eye on the property in dispute and they wanted to grab the same and in order to fulfill their bad intention, they procured a forged Will dated 16.10.1991 and got sanctioned the same in favour of Shish Ram son of Raghbir; that mutation no.2770 sanctioned in favour of Shish Ram was illegal and was liable to be set aside being not binding on her rights; that Ganga Sahai never executed any Will in favour of Shish Ram and that the suit land was ancestral property; and that Shish Ram had died in the year 1992-93, whereas Ganga Sahai expired in the year 2003 and he had not disclosed anything about the alleged Will in favour of Shish Ram.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the appellant and proforma respondent, who had pleaded that it was misconceived and there was a validly executed Will dated 16.10.1991 in favour of Shish Ram and on the basis of which, mutation no.2770 was rightly entered. It was pleaded that the Will was voluntarily executed by Ganga Sahai on account of his love and affection for Shish Ram.