HUKAM CHAND Vs. RISALO AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of the above mentioned two regular second appeals filed by Hukam Chand (since deceased) through his L.Rs. Smt. Jailo, Sunil, Niraj and Jitender appellants -defendants against Risalo respondent No. 1 -plaintiff and others as the same have arisen out of the same judgment and decree dated 17.3.2011 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak, vide which suits filed by Risalo have been dismissed. The appeals filed by Smt. Risalo against the judgment and decree have been allowed by learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2014 passed learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak these appeals have been filed by Hukam Chand appellant -defendant No. 1.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that one suit filed by Smt. Risalo against Hukam Chand and Manphool Singh -defendants for decree for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff was the owner and in joint possession of half share of land situated at Pakasma, Rohtak, as described in the plaint and defendant No. 1 Hukam Chand has no concern with the suit property along with the relief that if it was proved that the plaintiff was not in joint possession of half share of the suit land, then a decree for joint possession of half share be passed in favour of the plaintiff. Another suit filed by defendant No. 1 Hukam Chand as plaintiff against Risalo as defendant along with 14 defendants including Manphool and Smt. Anita as defendant No. 15 seeking the relief that plaintiff Hukam Chand was the owner in possession of half share of 1/6th share of late Smt. Bharto widow of Dhanpal qua the suit property situated at Village Kasrenti, District Rohtak along with the decree of cancellation of sale deed dated 8.11.2005 and further relief of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against defendant No. 15, their heirs, attorneys, assignees, servants etc., thereby restraining them from alienating, mortgaging or creating any third party interest. Both these suits were consolidated by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak and the suit filed by Risalo against Hukam Chand was considered to be the main suit.

(3.) ON the other hand, the case of defendant No. 1 Hukam Chand is that he was the son of Dhanpal and he was adopted by Smt. Bharto widow of Dhanpal in the month of June 1960. It was stated that after the adoption, the said Hukam Chand left the family of Manphool Singh and started living with his adoptive mother Smt. Bharto. After the death of Smt. Bharto in the month January 1979, the said land situated at Village Pakasma was inherited by Smt. Risalo and Hukam Chand in equal shares vide mutation No. 2972, which was executed and sanctioned on 16.4.1979. It was also stated that it was defendant No. 1, who had been in possession of the suit land, while the plaintiff had never remained in possession of the share of Smt. Bharto as she was living in Village Madina with her in -laws and it was defendant No. 1, who had been paying 'Batai Tihai' of the share of the land of the plaintiff. It was also stated that plaintiff Risalo was not the owner of the half share of the land, but she was owner of half share left by Smt. Bharto. Defendant No. 2 Manphool also filed written statement stating the same facts as stated by defendant No. 1.