(1.) This is Second Regular Appeal preferred by defendant appellants against the judgment dated 6.9.2008 passed by Additional District Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Gur- daspur, vide which the appeal preferred by the present appellants against the judgment dated 20.12.1999 passed by Sh. Harjinder Pal Singh, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Batala, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, was dismissed.
(2.) Suit was contested by the defendants in two sets. Defendant No. 1 filed separate written statement taking up the preliminary objections that the plaintiff had got no right or interest in the suit property and also that she was estopped by her act and conduct to file the suit against the defendants. The plaintiff and her father knew about the execution of valid Will dated 7.1.1977 duly executed by Kehar Singh, while he was having sound and disposing mind. Accordingly, mutation No. 2600 in respect of the suit property was sanctioned in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3 in the presence of defendant No. 1 and Jaswant Singh @ Jassa Singh, who admitted the correctness of the Will dated 7.1.1977 before the Revenue Authorities at the time of sanctioning of the said mutation. Said Jaswant Singh @ Jassa Singh died in August, 1995 and till his death, he had never challenged said mutation No. 2600 regarding the estate of deceased Kehar Singh. It was also objected that the suit was time barred. On merits, the relationship between the parties was admitted, but the death as alleged by the plaintiff was denied and it was specifically asserted that said Kehar Singh had died in August, 1977, leaving behind his two sons. It was positively asserted that Will dated 7.1.1977 executed by said Kehar Singh was legal and valid through which he had bequeathed his property to defendants No. 2 and 3 in equal shares. The plaintiff was frequently meeting the defendants and she was having full knowledge of the Will dated 7.1.1977 and also of the sanctioning of mutation No. 2600. Defendants No. 2 and 3 got admitted Darshan Kaur mother of the plaintiff, in Lal Hospital, Amritsar for her treatment and had spent about Rs. 30,000/- on her illness.
(3.) Defendants No. 2 and 3 had filed separate written statement but had taken almost similar stand as was taken up by defendant No. 1 in his separate written statement. It was also prayed by defendants No. 2 and 3 that the suit be dismissed.