HANUMAN Vs. PURSHOTAM KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has assailed order dated 29.01.2013 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Mohindergarh whereby an application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC filed by defendant No.1 now petitioner has been dismissed.

(2.) Purshotam Kumar and Prem Lata @ Sunita filed suit for declaration to the effect that they are owners of 1/7th share of Jagdish Parshad. One Hardial was the owner of landed property. He had one son Jhabar. Surji was married to Jhabar. Jhabar had three sons and four daughters namely Jagdish, Hanuman, Ram Bilas, Parvati, Triveni, Mishri and Bhagirathi. Ram Bilas was given in adoption to Maha Devi widow of Sunda son of Hardial therefore, he was not treated to be the family member of Jhabar. Jhabar died on 01.01.1962 and his landed property was apportioned in 7 equal shares each in favour of Surji (wife), Jagdish (son), Hanuman (son) and Parvati, Mishri, Triveni, Bhagirathi as daughters. Each one got 1/7th share of total land left by Jhabar. Jagdish was having 1/7th share. After his death, he left Santra as widow and Madan Lal as son. Madan Lal died in 1979. He was unmarried and issueless. Plaintiff No.1 claimed themselves to be beneficiary of Will dated 09.03.2009 executed by Santra. Plaintiff No.2 Prem Lata also claims herself to be widow of Madan Lal. They filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they are owners of 1/7th share from Jagdish. Plaintiff No.1 Purshotam Kumar claims himself to be brother of Santra and plaintiff No.2 claims herself to be widow of Madan Lal.

(3.) Trial Court framed the following issues:-