TAPINDERJIT KAUR GREWAL Vs. RATTANJIT KAUR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order four SAO Nos. 12, 13, 14 and 15 of 2012 are being disposed of. Facts are being taken from SAO No.12 of 2012.

(2.) In this appeal, judgment and decree dated 30.11.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar has been assailed, vide which judgment and decree dated 31.3.2008 passed by the trial Court has been set aside and the case has been remanded to the trial Court to decide afresh after framing issues and also to decide issue of guardian of minor defendants. However, no fresh evidence is required to be led as the parties have already stated in that context. Further it has been directed that party should be given chance to lead evidence on the issue if they so desire and the previous evidence already led may be read in newly framed issues also as well as in the issues already framed but not decided by the trial Court.

(3.) The salient features of the case are that plaintiff Tapinderjit Kaur Grewal is natural mother of defendants No.3 and 5, who were minor at the time of filing of the suit. Defendants No.1 and 2 are parents-in-law of plaintiff Tapinderjit Kaur. Defendant No.1 Gurmej Kaur, mother-in-law, died and she has been represented by Rattanjit Kaur, her daughter. A suit for declaration was filed by the plaintiff to the effect that she is owner in possession of land shown in annexures attached with the plaint on the basis of Will dated 28.1.1990 executed by her husband, Paramjit Singh Grewal (deceased). The Will dated 7.2.1990 was claimed to be not binding upon the plaintiff being forged and fabricated. Plaintiff filed a suit in respect of 41 kanals 3 marlas of land, 40 kanals of land and 1/3rd share of 38 kanals of land on the basis of aforesaid Will. All the three parcels of the land have been well defined in the plaint itself. Husband of the plaintiff, namely, Paramjit Singh Grewal, died on 9.2.1990. The suit in question was filed on 16.9.1992 by the plaintiff against defendants No.1 to 5.