(1.) This is defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 3.10.2009 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kaithal allowing the appeal of the plaintiffs/respondents (herein referred as the plaintiffs) and decreeing their suit for declaration and joint possession.
(2.) For the convenience of the parties and to adjudicate the real question in controversy the pe-digree table of both the parties is required to be reproduced here:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_171_LAWS(P&H)1_2012_1.html</FRM>
(3.) This suit has been filed by the plaintiffs Sarupi daughter and Chander Bhan daughter's son of Telu on 14.5.2002 challenging the mutation No.1283 dated 14.11.1980 and also the status of Sunehri Devi to be that of wife of Telu Ram. It has been alleged that Telu Ram was the son of Bishna and was married to Kauri who predeceased Telu. Telu had two daughters, namely Sarupi and Sarian from the loins of Telu and wedlock of Kauri. Sarian predeceased Telu leaving behind her son Chander Bhan. Telu died in the year1978. On the death of Telu mutation No.1283 dated 14.11.1980 was attested in the name of Sunehri Devi as widow, Chander Bhan (daughter's son) and Sarupi (daughter), in equal shares. It was also alleged that Telu was the owner in possession of 1/3rd share in 76 kanals 3 marlas as fully detailed in the heading of the plaint and on the death of Telu the mutation was sanctioned in favour of the aforesaid three persons. While challenging mutation No.1283 dated 14.11.1980 Sarupi and Chander Bhan averred that Sunehri Devi is not the widow of deceased Telu. She never performed Kareva with him but she was wrongly shown as widow of Telu vide mutation dated 14.11.1980. She was married to Surjan who was an employe of the Haryana Government and she is still drawing family pension which was permissible to her being widow of Surjan. Thus, while claiming ownership over 1/3rd share of Telu in the land as fully described in heading of the plaint, the plaintiffs challenged the mutation dated 14.11.1980.