HARBANS KAUR Vs. SUKHDEV KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNSUCCESSFUL plaintiff Smt. Harbans Kaur daughter of Shri Gurdial Singh (appellant herein) has filed the present regular second appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.2.1982 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Bhatinda who affirmed the judgment and decree dated 31.1.1978 passed by the Court of Sub Judge IIIrd Class, Bhatinda, who dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-appellant Smt. Harbans Kaur for declaration and joint possession.

(2.) THE case set up by the plaintiff-appellant in the trial Court was that she is the daughter of Shri Gurdial Singh (deceased) who was the owner in possession of 1/2 share in the land measuring 1850 kanals 16 marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Chathewala, fully described in the head note of the plaint. The said Shri Gurdial Singh had two wives, namely, Gurdial Kaur (defendant No 4) and Smt. Nand Kaur. Defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 Sukhdev Kaur, Bir Kaur and Dass Kaur are the daughters from defendant No. 4 Smt. Gurdial Kaur, whereas the plaintiff is the daughter from Smt. Nand Kaur who has expired. Shri Gurdial Singh aforesaid expired on 2.10.1971. Out of his 1/2 share in the suit land, Shri Gurdial Singh had given 1/4th share to defendant No. 4 during his life time and kept with himself 3/8th share. After the death of Gurdial Singh, the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are entitled to inherit the property in equal shares, but defendant No. 4 got the mutation sanctioned in favour of defendant Nos. 1 to 3 on the basis of Will dated 3.12.1963 allegedly executed by Shri Gurdial Singh. According to the plaintiff, the said Will dated 3.12.1963 had been executed by Shri Gurdial Singh through undue influence and coercion. He was not in sound and disposing mind at the time of the execution of the Will. The Will has not been executed by Shri Gurdial Singh in a voluntary manner and, as such, it is not binding upon the plaintiff/appellant. Resultantly, the plaintiff has made prayer that a decree for joint possession of 3/32 share in the suit land be passed in her favour with a declaration that mutation No. 3104 dated 9.5.1973 sanctioned in favour of defendant Nos. 1 to 3 on the basis of the Will dated 3.12.1963 is void, ineffective and does not bind the interest of the plaintiff.

(3.) ON merits it was the case of defendant Nos. 1 to 4 that the Will had been executed by Shri Gurdial Singh in favour of defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in a valid manner. With these pleas, these defendants made a prayer for the dismissal of the suit.