NACHHATAR SINGH Vs. SURJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants No. 1 and 2 are in Second Appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the ld. District Courts; whereby suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 for declaration and permanent injunction, has been partly decreed with costs by both the District Courts.

(2.) The pleaded case of the plaintiff is that he is owner of 1/8 share of the land comprised in Khewat No.308, Khatoni No.436, Rect.No.166, Killa No.10/2 (0K-16M), and he is also owner in possession of 1/8 share of the land comprised in Khewat No.388. Khatoni No.554, Rect. No 146, Killa No.23/2 (7K-0M). Rect.No.166. Killa No.3/2 (3K-0M), Kitta 2, area measuring 10 Kanal 0 Marla situated within the revenue estate of Village Jalalana, Tehsil and District Sirsa, being a legal heir of Nand Kaur alias Bibi, daughter of Bhag Singh. It was pleaded in the plaint that initially, Nand Kaur alias Bibi, predecessor in interest of the parties, was owner in possession of the suit property. Nand Kaur died on 28/5/2013. She had four sons and four daughters. One of the daughters namely Chotto Kaur also died. It was pleaded that therefore, the suit property was succeeded to by the plaintiff, defendants, and the performa defendants being the surviving legal heirs of Nand Kaur. Accordingly, declaration was sought that the plaintiff is owner in possession of 1/8th share of suit property.

(3.) It was further averred in the plaint that in June 2013, plaintiff came to know that defendants have obtained a forged Will of Nand Kaur alias Bibi. Accordingly, on 19/6/2013, plaintiff moved an application to the Tehsildar for not entering the mutation on the basis of forged Will dtd. 3/4/2013. However, vide order dtd. 16/9/2016, the District Revenue Officer, Sirsa had ordered that mutation be sanctioned in favour of the defendants on the basis of the said Will. It was prayed that the said order be set aside; and the alleged Will being illegal, be also set aside.