SMT. SUKHMA Vs. SMT. LICHHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant is in appeal. The original parties to the suit were two step sisters from the same father namely Shobha son of Nandu. For convenience, the parties are being referred to by their original position in the suit before the Court of First Instance i.e. the appellant (since deceased) as defendant and the respondent (since deceased) as plaintiff.

(2.) Shobha Earlier Married Phulia And From Their Union, Plaintiff- Lichhmi was bom. Thereafter, Shobha married Mehma and defendant-Sukhma was bom out of their wedlock. Shobha is stated to have died prior to the year 1956. Mehma had inherited his estate being his widow. Mehma died in the year 1983. Plaintiff claimed that Mehma during her lifetime executed Will dtd. 2/2/1983, whereby she bequeathed 1/2 share of the estate in favour of plaintiff and 1/2 share in favour of defendant. It was claimed by defendant that Mehma never executed any Will during her lifetime. The Will propounded by plaintiff was forged and fabricated document with the active connivance of Khazan Singh, Sarpanch, Lakhmi Chand, Panch and Svaiya, Lambardar and Ishwar Singh, son of plaintiff.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has assailed the findings recorded by Lower Appellate Court submitting that the impugned Will was signed by Ishwar Singh son of plaintiff. The same shows active connivance of the propounder of Will in execution thereof. Thus, the Trial Court rightly discarded the Will. It has been further contended that on 02/11/1983, the mutation of inheritance of Mehma was sanctioned in favour of Lichhmi as well as defendant. The Will was not produced. In appeal, the revenue authorities discarded the Will as the mutation was found to be defective. The Lower Appellate Court reversed the findings of the Trial Court on issue Nos.l, 2, 3, 4 and 7 and decreed the suit without dealing with the suspicious circumstances spelled out by the Court of First Instance.