CHAMELI DEVI Vs. JAGDISH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C .M. Nos. 4851 -4852C of 2009

(2.) BHAGWAN Singh was owner of half share of 186 kanals 6 marlas i.e. 93 kanals 3 marlas. He transferred his share in the land in favour of his wife Paravati and to the second wife Chameli Devi in equal shares. He also had a share in 27 kanals 3 marals of land and transferred the same in favour of Jagdish, son of Desh Ram, who was the contesting defendant in the litigation, which was filed by Chameli Devi in November, 2000 against him and 12 proforma defendants arrayed in the suit. The suit was for declaration to the effect that she is owner in possession of land measuring 44 kanals i.e. 880/3726th share of the land described in para 1 of the plaint and she is entitled to get her name entered in the revenue records. She also challenged the gift deed dated 29th June, 1994 in favour of Jagdish, who was a legatee of Bhagwan Singh. She claimed that the gift deed was not binding on her rights. She also sought an order of injunction against Jagdish from interfering in their peaceful possession of the suit property. Bhagwan Singh died on 21st April, 1995 and his first wife Parvati expired on 7th July, 1996. The plaintiff claimed that she is also a legally wedded wife of Bhagwan Singh and on death of her husband became a Class I heir as per the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The marriage between Bhagwan Singh and Parvati also yielded no issue. The plaintiff Chameli Devi also bore no child to Bhagwan Singh. Chameli Devi claimed she married Bhagwan Singh prior to 1956. Chameli Devi and Parvati were issueless and on the death of Parvati, Chameli Devi claimed to be the only surviving heir of Bhagwan Singh and Parvati and entitled to succeed to Bhagwan Singh's estate. Chameli Devi pleaded that neither Bhagwan Singh nor Parvati had given any land to Jagdish. It was pleaded that Bhagwan Singh's land situated in Village Nathera comprising 27 kanals 3 marlas devolved on Jagdish by a civil court decree in Civil Suit No. 322 of 1991. However, mutation of inheritance was not sanctioned in favour of Jagdish. She pleaded that Jagdish had taken Bhagwan Singh and Parvati to Tehsildar office and procured their signatures on some blank papers on which a gift deed was executed instead of mutation in his favour in respect of land measuring 44 kanals, as above stated. He had assured Bhagwan Singh and Parvati that the purpose of visit to Tehsil office was only for sanctioning of mutation in respect of 27 kanals 3 marlas of land. The gift deed was registered in Tehsil Kosli. It was never the intention of Bhagwan Singh and Parvati to give the suit land to Jagdish. On the basis of gift deed, Jagdish wanted to encroach upon the suit land in another village. Chameli Devi asked Jagdish to admit that the gift deed was null and void, but he did not relent. This is what brought Chameli Devi to institute the present suit against Jagdish etc.

(3.) THE suit was contested by Jagdish by filing a written statement. He took several preliminary objections including bar of limitation. He claimed that Bhagwan Singh and Parvati had given 27 kanals 3 marals land to him in a family settlement which resulted in a compromise decree dated 7th September, 1991. Jagdish claimed that 44 kanals of land was given to him by the couple due to love and affection through the gift deed dated 29th June, 1994. The gift was accepted and on registration the possession passed to Jagdish. This is how Jagdish came into ownership of total 71 kanals and 3 marlas of land. Jagdish urged that since Bhagwan Singh and Parvati had already transferred the land coming to their share in joint property became his and, therefore, at the time of their death, they were not owners of any land and, therefore, the question of succeeding Bhagwan Singh and Parvati by the plaintiff does not arise by succession opening. Jagdish also claimed that about 27 or 28 years ago before the suit was filed Bhagwan Singh and Parvati adopted him for services rendered to them due to which Bhagwan Singh and Parvati had given the suit land to the defendant Jagdish by way of gift deed, which was registered document. Also Jagdish was in possession of the corpus. He prayed that the suit be dismissed.