RANDHIR SINGH Vs. SATBIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT Nos. 1 and 3 are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the decree dated 31.3.1995 suffered by Daryao Singh, father of appellant No. 1 and grandfather of appellant No. 2, has been declared illegal, null and void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff.

(2.) DARYAO Singh-plaintiff had three sons, namely, Randhir Singh; Ram Singh and Satbir Singh and a daughter Shanti Devi. On 31.3.1995, one suit was filed by Randhir Singh son of Daryao Singh, Manoj and Parveen sons of Ram Singh son of Daryao Singh against Daryao Singh. It was asserted that the property is a joint Hindu family property and in view of the family settlement, the land in dispute has fallen to the share of the plaintiff. On the same day, admission written statement was filed by Daryao Singh and on the basis of the said written statement, decree was passed in favour of the present defendants.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants has vehemently argued that the property was a joint Hindu family property. In the earlier suit, the plaintiff has appeared as a witness and admitted the claim of the present defendants. Such statement was made before the Court and that the plaintiff was also identified in the Court. Therefore, it was not open to the plaintiff to dispute the passing of the decree on the ground of alleged fraud. It is also contended that the two decrees were passed on the same day i.e. 31.3.1995, which settles the share of three sons of Daryao Singh in equitable manner. Therefore, the decree could not be challenged by the plaintiff merely on change of mind in the manner of bequest.