TINKU Vs. SAURABH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM-52-C-2021

(2.) The plaintiff-appellant has filed this Regular Second Appeal challenging correctness of concurrent findings of fact arrived at by both the Courts while dismissing his suit seeking decree of declaration that he is owner of the suit land to the extent of 3/10th share as the suit property is Joint Hindu Family Coparcenary Property. The plaintiff also claims that the property detailed in para 1 of the plaint is also ancestral.

(3.) Some facts are required to be noticed. The name of plaintiff's grandfather was Ghasitu son of Kapuri son of Dundi. He (Ghasitu) married twice during his lifetime. He firstly married with Smt. Zile and from the aforesaid wedlock, a son Tarsem was born. Thereafter, Ghasitu again got married with Phulo Devi, defendant No.4 and out of that wedlock, late Sh. Rajpal was born. The plaintiff is the son of late Sh. Rajpal. Ghasitu also had two daughters, however, it is not clear that whether they were born from his first or second marriage. It is not in dispute that late Sh. Rajpal died on 08.01.1993 when the plaintiff was barely 2 years and 3 months old. His mother (the widow of Rajpal) i.e. Rani re-married with Avtar Singh, resident of Una (State of Himachal Pradesh), after a period of 9 months of death of Rajpal. It is the case of the plaintiff that he went with his mother and resided there. The plaintiff claims that there he was also called Raman. The plaintiff himself has pleaded that late Sh. Ghasitu, who died in May 2003, apart from inheriting certain property from his father Kapuri, purchased various pieces of agriculture land, details whereof have been given in para 9 and 10 of the plaint.