PRITAM SINGH Vs. PARAMJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present Regular Second Appeal against judgment and decree dated 09.01.2004 whereby the First Appellate Court dismissed the appeal against judgment and decree dated 12.04.2002, passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Ludhiana.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as per their status before the Court of first instance. The detailed facts of the case have already been recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below. Relevant facts for the purpose of decision of present Regular Second Appeal that plaintiff-Paramjit Kaur had filed suit for declaration to the effect that she is owner in joint possession to the extent of 1/6th share, out of the property measuring 83 kanals 4 marlas, as detailed in schedule of the plaint. Her father Bachan Singh and defendant Nos.1 to 5 were owners in joint possession to the extent of 1/3rd share, out of the property measuring 259 kanals 16 marlas. Bachan Singh died in the year 1972, intestate leaving behind plaintiff and defendants as his natural and legal heirs and mutation was sanctioned in favour of Pritam Singh, Avtar Singh and Jagtar Singh to the extent of 1/2 shares and Smt. Harpal Kaur widow of Bachan Singh to the extent of 1/2 share. Plaintiff and defendant No.4 were not given any notice at the time of sanctioning of the mutation. Bachan Singh had not deprived her from share in his estate nor had executed any Will in favour of anybody regarding his property. Joginder Singh, grand-father of plaintiff, died in the year 1993, intestate and his property was transferred in the name of plaintiff and defendants in equal shares on the basis of natural succession.

(3.) Defendants contested the suit and taken the plea that suit is time barred and plaintiff estopped by her act and conduct from filing the present suit. Plaintiff was unmarried when Bachan Singh died and it was in her knowledge that Bachan Singh had executed Will dated 15.12.1971 in favour of his sons Pritam Singh, Jagtar Singh and Avtar Singh to the extent of 1/2 share and Harpal Kaur widow to the extent of 1/2 share. Plaintiff and Charanjit Kaur were present at the time of sanctioning of mutation. They have also admitted the execution of Will executed by Bachan Singh. Marriage of plaintiff was performed by defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 5 as per their status after spending huge amount. The present suit was filed at the instance of husband of plaintiff, out of greed to grab the property of the defendants. So, the defendants are owner in possession of the suit property only on the basis of Will of Bachan Singh dated 15.12.1971.