SMT. SURAJ KAUR Vs. SOM DATTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition filed by Smti. Suraj Kaur Defendant against the order dated October 9, 1974, of the Additional District Judge, Ambala at Gurgaon, whereby he accepted the appeal of Som Dutt Plaintiff and set aside the order dated November 28, 1973, of the Senior Sub -Judge, Gurgaon, and remitted the case to him for further proceedings in the case in accordance with law.

(2.) THE facts of this case are that Bahadur Singh, resident of village Baluda, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, was owner of the land in suit situated in village Baluda and Bhondsi, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, the details of which are given in Schedule 'A' attached to the plaint. Suraj Kaur Defendant is the wife of Bahadur Singh. Bahadur Singh died on April 15, 1970, leaving no male issue. Bahadur Singh had executed a registered will dated March 15, 1969, in favour of the Plaintiff bequeathing the land in suit and also other properties to him. However, the Defendant Suraj Kaur had set up a will alleged to have been executed by Bahadur Singh in her favour and was claiming to be entitled to inherit the property. Som Dutt Plaintiff filed this suit for a declaration to the effect that he is the owner of this land in suit and is entitled to withdraw the amounts from the Court of the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Gurgaon, as he is the sole heir of these properties of Bahadur Singh, that' the will propounded by the Defendant is a forged one and she has no right, title or interest in the property. In the alternative it was prayed that if he was not found in possession of the land in suit then decree for possession of the same may be passed in his favour. The Defendant contested this suit. The allegations made in the plaint were denied. The factum and the validity of the will alleged to have been executed by the deceased in favour of the Plaintiff was denied, It was pleaded that the alleged will, if any, in favour of the Plaintiff had been cancelled and Bahadur Singh executed his last will dated December 28, 1969, in her favour and she is entitled to the property in dispute. On these pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial Court on April 25, 1972:

(3.) THEREAFTER , the evidence of the Plaintiff was recorded and he closed his affirmative evidence on February 12, 1973, and the case was adjourned for the evidence of the Defendant to March 21, 1973. On the same date i.e. on February 12, 1973, the parties made a joint application stating that for the decision of this case they have appointed Ganga Ram Sarpanch, Lakhmi Chand, Tek Chand, Sher Singh, Mangtu, Ranjit and Mam Chand as referees and they shall be entitled to record evidence and to make enquiries in the presence or in the absence of the parties and the decision given by the referees will be binding on the parties. It was further mentioned that if any of the Referees dies or refuses to act as such, then the remaining six Referees will decide the matter and Ganga Ram Sarpanch will have a casting vote. However, if two of the Referees refuse to act as such or they died, then the remaining Referees will give decision by majority vote. The statement of Som Dutt Plaintiff was also recorded on the same date i.e. February 12, 1973, by the Court, wherein he mentioned that this application Exhibit P.X. had been read over to him and he admitted the same to be correct and that he agreed to the reference to the Referees and would be bound by the decision given by them and he shall not file any appeal or revision against that decision. Similarly, statement of Shrimati Suraj Kaur Defendant was also recorded by the Senior Sub -Judge. The Senior Sub -Judge then passed the following order on February 12, 1973: