DILA RAM Vs. JETHU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs are in appeal against the judgment and decree of both the Courts below. According to the case of the plaintiffs, Bhulli Devi (hereinafter referred to as the "plaintiff") was the owner in possession of the suit land. She filed suit for declaration that she is owner in possession of the land in dispute and the relinquishment deeds No. 972, 973 and 974, all dated 23.01.2004 by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendants No. 2 to 4 and the mutation sanctioned on the basis of the said relinquishment deeds are illegal, null and void and prayed for the consequential relief of possession. She alleged that General Power of Attorney dated 10.09.2002 obtained by defendant No. 1, who happened to be her brother's son, was an act of fraud because it was executed on misrepresentation by defendant No. 1 that it was required for partition of the property inherited by the plaintiff along with her brothers from their father, but later on defendant No. 1 executed 3 relinquishment deeds dated 23.01.2004 as Attorney of the plaintiff in favour of his two sons and brother. When plaintiff Bhulli Devi came to know about the said relinquishment deeds in June 2005, she immediately got cancelled GPA dated 10.09.2002 vide cancellation deed dated 17.06.2005 and executed a separate registered Will dated 17.06.2005 bequeathing her share in the property in favour of his five brothers or their legal heirs in equal shares and also filed the present suit on 25.07.2005.

(2.) COUNSEL for the appellants has submitted that the plaintiff had applied on 15.10.2005 to the Trial Court that her statement may be recorded because she is an old lady. Her examination -in -chief was recorded on 03.12.2005, but her cross -examination was deferred and, thereafter, she died on 07.10.2006 without her cross -examination.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and also examined the record with his able assistance.