LAWS(P&H)-2010-8-279

SITA RAM Vs. MANGLA RAM AND ORS

Decided On August 25, 2010
SITA RAM Appellant
V/S
Mangla Ram and Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sita Ram plaintiff has filed the instant second appeal having failed in both the courts below.

(2.) Plaintiff's case is that his mother Kalawati since deceased was daughter of Mam Chand. It was also alleged that defendants No. 1 and 2 and defendants No. 3 and 4 and proforma defendant No. 9 are sons and daughters of Mam Chand. Gora was wife of Mam Chand. Mam Chand was owner in possession of the suit land measuring 5 bighas 16 biswas being 1/4th share of 23 bighas 5 biswas and was also owner in possession of 4 bighas 1 biswa land being 1/4th share of 16 bighas 5 biswas land. Mam Chand died on 9.2.1983 and on his death, plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and proforma defendant No. 9 and Smt. Gora inherited suit land in equal shares i.e. 1/7th share each. Gora also died on 25.7.1990 and on her death, her share was inherited by plaintiff, defendant No. 1 to 4 and proforma defendant No. 9. Thus, the plaintiff claimed that plaintiff, defendant Nos. 1 to 4 and proforma defendant No. 9 are owners in possession of the suit land in equal shares i.e. 1/6th share each. Inheritance mutation of Mam Chand was wrongly sanctioned in favour of defendants No. 1 to 4 and Gora only and similarly inheritance mutation of Gora was wrongly sanctioned in favour of defendants No. 1 to 4 only. Defendants No. 1 to 4 on the basis of said mutations sold suit land to defendants No. 5 to 7 vide sale deed dated 16.11.1992. The said sale deed has also been challenged in the suit in addition to the inheritance mutations of Mam Chand and Gora.

(3.) Defendants No. 1, 2 and 5 to 8 contested the suit and denied the plaint allegations. It was pleaded that plaintiff's mother Kalawati was not daughter of Mam Chand and Gora. It was alleged that only defendants No. 1 to 4 are sons and daughters of Mam Chand. Even proforma defendant No. 9 is not daughter of Mam Chand. Inheritance mutations of Mam Chand and Gora were rightly sanctioned. Sale deed by defendants No. 1 to 4 in favour of defendants No. 5 to 8 is also valid. Various other pleas were also raised.