GURDIAL SINGH Vs. RATTAN KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gurdial Singh, who remained unsuccessful both in the trial Court as well as in the first appellate Court, has filed the present regular second appeal, which has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 2-2-1987 passed by the Court of Shri G.S. Khurana, Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, who affirmed the judgment and decree dated 18-10-1984 passed by the Court of Sh. Dhian Singh, Sub Judge, Ist Class, Nakodar.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Gurdial Singh filed a suit praying that a decree for declaration be passed in his favour and against the defendant-respondent Smt. Rattan Kaur, declaring that the plaintiff-appellant is the owner and in possession of the land measuring 53 kanals 18 marlas, fully described in the head note of the plaint, situated in the area of village Shidwan, Tehsil Nakodar, District Jalandhar, on the basis of the will dated 2-1-1969. The plaintiff also prayed for perpetual injunction that defendant Smt. Rattan Kaur be restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff of the suit property.

(3.) The case set up by the plaintiff was that Jagat Singh son of Fateh Singh was the real uncle of the plaintiff and he was the owner of the land in dispute. Said Jagat Singh died on 20-7-1974 and he executed a will dated 2-1-1969 in his favour because of the services rendered by the plaintiff to the deceased during his life-time. Jagat Singh was unmarried. The plaintiff used to look after him. The plaintiff is in possession of the suit property. Defendant Smt. Rattan Kaur is a clever lady and managed to get mutation of inheritance in her favour. The order of the revenue authority sanctioning mutation in favour of the defendant has caused a cloud on the rights of the plaintiff. The defendant wants to take undue advantage of the mutation order and wants to disturb the possession of the plaintiff. The defendant alleges that Jagat Singh has executed a will dated 26-11-1971 in her favour. In fact, no such will was executed by the deceased in favour of the defendant. The will propounded by the defendant dated 26-11-1971 is a forged document. The deceased never executed any will in favour of the defendant. The will propounded by the defendant was the result of fraud, misrepresentation and concealment of material facts.