GURNAIB KAUR Vs. ACHHRA SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 5786.C of 20111. For the reasons mentioned in the application which is accompanied by affidavit, delay of 15 days in refilling the appeal is condoned.

(2.) Plaintiff alleged that she is daughter of Jeet Singh alias Surjit Singh. Defendants No. 2 and 3 are also daughter and son respectively of Jeet Singh whereas defendant No. is son of defendant No. 3. The plaintiff alleged that Jeet Singh was owner in possession of 1/10 share in the land measuring 214 bighas 16 biswas as mentioned in the plaint and on his death the same was inherited by plaintiff and defendants No. 2 and 3 in equal shares i.e. l/3rd share each. However, inheritance mutation of Jeet Singh had been sanctioned in favour of defendant No. 1 only whereas defendant No. 1 had no right, title or interest in the suit land. The plaintiff accordingly sought declaration that she is owner in possession to the extent of l/3rd share of 1/40 share of 214 bighas 16 biswas land in question and the revenue entries in favour of defendant No. I are liable to be corrected. The plaintiff also sought decree for joint possession of the suit land along with permanent injunction.

(3.) Defendant No. 2 admitted that suit land was owned and possessed by Jeet Singh. It was, however, pleaded that Jeet Singh had only one son i.e. defendant No. 3 and only one daughter i.e. defendant No. 2. It was denied that plaintiff is daughter of Jeet Singh. It was pleaded that inheritance mutation of Jeet Singh has been rightly sanctioned in favour of defendant No. 1 who has become owner in possession of the suit land because Jeet Singh executed registered Will dated 1.12.1998 in favour of defendant No. 1. Plaintiff has thus no right, title or interest in the suit land. Various other pleas were also raised.