INDERJIT KAUR Vs. KULJEET SINGH SHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this single judgment, I shall dispose of two abovenoted connected cases, which are arising out of same facts.

(2.) First the facts of CR No. 6555 of 2015. In this civil revision Inderjit Kaur has impugned order dated 14.8.2015 (Annexure-P-7), passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, whereby an application filed by petitioner under Order 26 Rule XII (2) CPC read with Section 151 CPC, 1908 for re-examination and taking second opinion on signatures of Will in dispute has been dismissed. The civil suit was filed in the year 2011.

(3.) Unfortunate controversy between the siblings is regarding the property i.e. House No. 605, Sector-16-D, Chandigarh, left behind by Dr. Harnam Singh Shan. Dr. Harnam Singh Shan died leaving behind a son, namely, Kuljeet Singh, and three daughters, namely, Smt. Inderjit Kaur wife of Major General Gaganjit Singh (Retd.), Smt. Tejinder Kaur Bindra, now settled in New York, USA, and Smt. Pushpinder Kaur, now settled in Michigan, USA. Dr. Harnam Singh Shan was owner of House No. 605, Sector-16-D, Chandigarh. Dr. Harnam Singh Shan is stated to have executed unregistered Will dated 25.5.2011 regarding kothi and other property in favour of his son Kuljeet Singh and three daughters Smt. Inderjit Kaur, Smt. Tejinder Kaur Bindra and Smt. Pushpinder Kaur. The ownership right of first floor are recorded to have been already gifted in favour of his son Kuljeet Singh. All the daughters are recorded to have been given joint ownership of completely constructed ground floor (including adjacent constructed rooms as well as lawns) and also second floor of kothi No. 605, Sector-16-D, Chandigarh. It is also not denied by parties that on 28.5.2011, i.e. after three days of execution of unregistered Will, Dr. Harnam Singh Shan, who happened to be 88 years of age and was suffering from general diseases relating to old age, was shifted to PGI Chandigarh. He died on 9.6.2011. Kuljeet Singh filed civil suit for declaration that he is the sole and absolute owner of one fourth share in the ground floor, entire first and second floor of House No. 605, Sector-16-D, Chandigarh. Defendants were sought to be restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of plaintiff and restraining defendant No. 4 to transfer the house on the basis of forged and fabricated Will dated 25.5.2011. He also sought partition by way of possession of said house by metes and bounds. It was further prayed that since partition is not possible in Chandigarh, therefore, house be sold by way of auction among the co-owners or in alternative by way of putting the house on auction in public and divide the proceeds as per the shares of plaintiff and defendants No. 1 to It also comes out that in the civil suit on 21.11.2011, when defendants No. 1 to 3 for the first time disclosed about said Will dated 25.5.2011, plaintiff filed an application that said Will be produced and placed on Court file, so that he may get the same inspected from handwriting expert and file replication and it was also disclosed by plaintiff that he has already approached Mr. Parsad, handwriting expert, who wants to take photographs and to inspect the original Will for giving his opinion. This Court is informed by parties that Will was produced, issues were framed, at which stage an application dated 6.5.2013 was filed by defendants that official of Punjab National Bank, Sector-16-D, Chandigarh, be summoned alongwith original record and that the questioned documents alognwith original record be sent for comparison to Government Examiner of questioned documents, Railway Board Building, Shimla, or any other Government institution for examination and report.