(1.) THE defendants-Vendees from Mohinder Kaur, are in second appeal, aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff along with defendant No. 2 are owners in possession of land measuring 86 kanals 9 marlas; for setting aside undated will allegedly executed by Pritam Singh in favour of defendant No. 1 Mohinder Kaur and the decree dated 16.12.1966 (correct date 16.11.1966) based on fraudulent Will, was decreed.
(2.) ONE Pritam Singh was owner of land measuring 86 kanals 9 marlas of land situated in village Sargondi, Tehsil Phillaur. He died on 13.5.1965, leaving behind three daughters, namely, Naranjan Kaur, Chhindo, Mohinder Kaur and one son Gurbax Singh. After the death of Pritam Singh, one of his daughters, namely, Mohinder Kaur filed a civil suit alleging Will by Pritam Singh in her favour. On the basis of said Will, a decree declaring Mohinder Kaur as heir of Pritam Singh was passed on 16.11.1966. Thereafter, a rapat Roznamcha was entered by the Patwari on 10.6.1968 and consequently a mutation Exhibit D.10 was entered in the name of Mohinder Kaur on 6.7.1968. Gurbax Singh, son of Pritam Singh died on 16.12.1971, leaving behind his daughter Harjit Kaur and son Harjit Singh. On 13.10.1972, Smt. Naranjan Kaur and Chhindo, daughters of Pritam Singh along with minor son and daughter of Gurbax Singh, filed the present suit for declaration in respect of the ownership rights as well as challenging the decree dated 16.11.1966. In the said suit, a finding has been returned by the learned trial Court that the Will allegedly executed by Pritam Singh, nor the decree dated 16.11.1966 has been produced on record and, therefore, passed a decree sought for by the plaintiffs. The appeal met the same fate and consequently, the defendants are in second appeal.
(3.) BEFORE proceeding further, it would be relevant to reproduce para 4 of the plaint, wherein, the decree dated 16.11.1966 was sought to be challenged :-