KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. DARYAO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff have approached this Court through the present regular second appeal. They have challenged the judgment and decree dated January 31, 1981 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak whereby the appeal filed by the defendants was allowed and after setting aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court the suit filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they are owners in possession of the land in dispute and also sought permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering into the possession of the plaintiffs. Alternatively, a decree for possession of the lead in question was sought.

(3.) The plaintiffs claimed that the land in dispute was originally owned by Bujjan. He gifted the property to Prabhu who was daughter's son of Nand Ram, real brother of Bujjan. Prabhu died on April 11, 1976. He died issueless and without any wife. The plaintiffs claimed that they are collaterals of Bujjan and on the death of Prabhu, the land in dispute which had been gifted originally by Bujjan, had reverted back to Bujjan. On that basis, they claim that they were entitled to succeed to the aforesaid land left behind by Prabhu. The plaintiffs also claimed that the parties were governed by customary law in the matters of alienation and succession. Since the defendants were setting up a registered Will dated October 14, 1966 executed by Prabhu in their favour, therefore, the plaintiffs claimed that the aforesaid Will was a forged and fictitious document and was never executed by Prabhu and in any case Prabhu had no right to execute any Will qua the ancestral property. On that basis, the plaintiffs claimed that the said Will was not binding upon their rights in any manner. Accordingly, the plaintiffs filed a suit for seeking declaration and other reliefs, as noticed above.