SOM PAL Vs. KASHMIRI LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One of the defendants is before this Court impugning the order dated 28.9.2013 (Annexure P-6), passed by the learned Court below vide which the counter-claim filed by defendant no. 3, namely, Ompal son of Madan Lal in the suit filed by Kashmiri Lal son of Om Parkash, was held to be maintainable.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit was filed by Kashmiri Lal seeking declaration to the effect that Will dated 20.9.2003 executed by Smt. Sona Devi is forged and fabricated and so the probate obtained on the basis thereof. The same is not binding on the plaintiff- Kashmiri Lal and defendant nos. 4 to 6, namely Sham Lal, Pawan Kumar and Ram Dhan sons of Om Parkash. Sona Devi was grand mother of the petitioner, whereas she was maternal grand-mother of the plaintiff and defendant nos. 4 to 6. Probate had been issued in favour of the petitioner on the basis of Will. The claim in the suit filed by Kashmiri Lal was on the basis of two collusive decrees dated 27.9.1991 and 10.2.1992 passed in favour of plaintiff therein and defendant nos. 4 to 6.

(3.) In the suit filed by Kashmiri Lal, defendant no. 3 Ompal while filing written statement, filed counter-claim praying that the alleged Will dated 20.9.2003 and probate issued on the basis thereof be declared illegal, null and void. There was no relief claimed against the plaintiff in the suit namely Kashmiri Lal. It was further submitted that Ompal and Naresh both sons of Madan Lal even filed a separate suit against the petitioner Som Pal and Balak Ram son of Bichha Ram claiming the same relief as was prayed for in the counter-claim, inter-alia on the plea that they are in possession of the property as Dholidar.