SMT. KAMALBI Vs. JASMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to this revision petition may briefly be stated as under:

(2.) ONE Kalu was survived by two sons Bhabloo and Bhoop Singh Bhoop Singh's son was Jasmal and Bhabloo's wife was Kamalbi. Bhabloo died on June 17, 1968. His property was mutated in favour of his widow Kamalbi. Jasmal respondent brought a suit for declaration to the effect that Kamalbi was not the legally wedded wife of Bhabloo de -ceased and that he was entitled to inherit the property left by his uncle Bhabloo deceased. The suit was brought on July 9, 1970. In that case an exparte decree was passed by the learned trial judge on October 5, 1970. The exparte evidence led by Jasmal was discussed by the learned trial Court Judge in the following terms:

(3.) MR . Sarin, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently argued that the petitioner was an illiterate and 75 years old woman and the respondent was clever enough to get a false report on the summons to the effect that she had refused service. He further submitted that even in para 3 of the written statement, said to have been filed by the respondent on November 19, 1971, no exact particulars of the ex -parte decree had been given. On this basis, the learned counsel argued that the findings recorded by the learned Courts below to the effect that the petitioner had knowledge of the decree stood vitiated.