GURNAM SINGH Vs. ANGREJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Regular Second Appeal at the instance of the defendants against the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court, whereby the appeal of the plaintiffs has been accepted and the suit had been decreed.

(2.) IT would be apt to mention brief facts.

(3.) ANGREJ Singh and others -plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that they are owners in possession of land measuring 37 kanals 12 marlas, i.e., 2/5th share out of land measuring 69 kanals 9 marlas, i.e., the share of Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh son of Mangal Singh as described in the head -note of the plaint and as well as for declaration that plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 are the exclusive owners in possession of the house and defendants and plaintiff No.1 have nothing to do with the tubewell account No.N -564, now account No.N -75, which was in the name of Balwinder Kaur, who is exclusive owner in possession of Kotha/Tubewell and Will dated 21.10.1999 executed by Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh was false, fictitious document and had no bearing on the rights of the plaintiffs. Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh had five sons, namely, Gurnam Singh (defendant No.1), Baldev Singh (defendant No.2), Angrej Singh (plaintiff No.1), Sukhdev Singh (defendant No.3) and Niranjan Singh (since deceased) represented through L.Rs, namely, Smt.Balwinder Kaur, Lovepreet Kaur and Arshdeep Singh -plaintiff Nos.2 to 4. Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh alleged to have executed a Will dated 20.10.1999, registered on 21.10.1999 in respect of 14 kanals of land out of total land measuring 69 kanals 9 marlas and the said 14 kanals was bequeathed in favour of Harjinder Singh, Kuldip Singh sons of Baldev Singh and Hira Singh son of Sukhdev Singh in equal shares and rest of the property as per Will was ordered to be bequeathed in favour of all the five sons in equal shares. The plaintiffs claimed declaration of the suit land and as well as electric tubewell connection on the ground that Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh had never executed a Will in favour of the defendants and on 5.10.1999, Gurnam Singh, Baldev Singh, Angrej Singh and Sukhdev Singh had moved an application to the Sub Registrar to the effect that Ajit Singh @ Jit Singh was not of sound and disposing mind. It was further averred that plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 were in possession of the house as detailed in the head -note of the plaint.