ZORA SINGH Vs. MANGO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against judgment and decree dated 15.1.2002 of the court of Additional District Judge, Ferozepur, whereby reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.9.2000 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ferozepur declaring the plaintiff as owner of the suit land on cancellation of mutation sanctioned on the basis of Will dated 12.4.1991 of his predecessor -in -interest Natha Singh, suit of the plaintiff was dismissed in toto.

(2.) NATHA Singh father of plaintiff Zora Singh as also of defendants Smts. Mango, Bachno, Jeeto and Meeto and husband of defendant Smt. Bant Kaur, was owner in possession of suit land measuring 36 Kanal 16 Marlas detailed and described in the plaint. He had willed away, interalia, the said land on 12.4.1991 in favour of the plaintiff alone. Natha Singh died on 24.4.1992. The Will was posthumously registered on 1.6.1995. The defendants viz. widow and daughters allegedly appeared before the Joint Registrar, Guruharsahai. Later on, the defendants got the mutation of inheritance of Natha Singh sanctioned in favour of all the legal heirs on 28.2.1997 whereby the Will of the deceased in favour of the plaintiff was ignored. Request of the plaintiff to admit his claim of ownership as per Will dated 12.4.1991 did not find favour with the defendants.

(3.) ON notice having been issued, the defendants appeared and contested the suit tooth and nail. Claiming the Will of 12.4.1991 to be false and fabricated document, it was also denied that any notice of registration of the Will had been sent to anyone. Rather, it was proclaimed that the Will was registered at the back of the plaintiff. Any statement made by sisters in favour of the plaintiff at the time of registration of the Will, was denied. Furnishing of evidence by them concealing claim of the plaintiff was also denied. Denying the ownership of all the legal heirs of the deceased, to be co -owners in equal share, the plaintiff had asserted testamentary succession in his favour declaring him complete and absolute owner of the property. Claiming the suit to be false and frivolous, dismissal of the same was sought.