SURINDER PAL Vs. HARISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of three cases, namely RSA No. 1913/1990, Surinder Pal v. Harish Kumar and others, 2003(1) R.C.R.(Civil) 309; RSA No. 2430 of 2000, Pushpa Devi v. Surinder Pal; and COCP No. 265 of 1998, Pushpa Devi v. Surinder Pal, as all the three cases are inter-connected. In fact, counsel for the parties submitted before me at the Bar that decision of RSA No. 1913 of 1990 would decide RSA No. 2430/2000 and COCP No. 265/1998. Thus, the facts of RSA No. 1913/1990 may be noticed.

(2.) THIS regular second appeal, bearing RSA No. 1913/1990, has been filed by Surinder Pal, plaintiff against the judgments and decrees of the courts below, whereby the suit filed by Surinder Pal was dismissed by the trial Court and the appeal filed by him was also dismissed by the learned District Judge.

(3.) SAID suit was contested by the defendants 1 to 5. It was denied that Nathu Ram had executed any will in favour of the plaintiff. On the other hand, it was pleaded that in fact, Nathu Ram had executed Will dated 21.9.1982 in favour of plaintiff and defendants 1 to 5 and that it was the last Will of Nathu Ram and that he had not executed any subsequent Will. It was alleged that the plaintiff had no concern with the shops nor these shops were given to the plaintiff by Nathu Ram deceased by virtue of any Will. It was alleged that defendants 1 to 5, being owners of the said shops were entitled to recover the rent from the deceased. Defendants 6 and 7 (tenants of the shops) in their separate written statement took up the plea that they will make the payment of the rent to the person declared as owner by the court.