RAM PHUL SINGH Vs. SUDARSHANA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendant has come up in appeal against the judgement and decree of the first appellate Court affirming on appeal those of the trial judge, whereby the suit of the plaintiff for possession by way of partition of the suit property was decreed.

(2.) The facts :-

(3.) Undisputably, the property in dispute belonged to Madho Parsad. He had two sons, namely, Sham Phul Singh and Ram Phul Singh. Sham Phul Singh was succeeded to by his widow Smt. Brahmwati. She had 1/2 share in the property in dispute, No fault can be found with the conclusion arrived at by the Courts below that the plaintiff and defendant had 1/2 share each in the property in dispute. The finding recorded by the first appellate Court that the will executed by the plaintiff in favour of Sudarshana Kumari is valid. Having gone through the evidence produced on the record, I find no infirmity in the conclusion arrived at by the first appellate Court that the will executed by the plaintiff in favour of Sudarshana Kumari is valid.