RAM BILAS GUPTA Vs. KRISHAN AVTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that plaintiff Sh.Ram Bilas Gupta son of late Sh.Gajadhar Gupta, aged 63 years, resident of Delhi had filed a suit against his brothers Krishan Avtar and Ram Avtar besides others seeking a declaration that Will dated 21.1.1998 executed by Smt.Angoori Devi is liable to be declared null and void further craving for grant of consequential relief of setting aside of sale deeds dated 3.3.2004 bearing Nos.2259, 2258, 2257 as well as sale deeds dated 31.5.2005 and 28.10.2005 being null and void.

(2.) As per the case of the plaintiff, his father Sh.Gajadhar Gupta had given life time interest in his property to Smt.Angoori Devi (wife of Sh.Gajadhar) and after death of Smt.Angoori Devi, the property was to devolve upon the parties in equal shares, however, during her life time Smt.Angoori Devi executed a Will dated 21.1.1998, which she could not do; that she had expired on 2.2.2001 without cancelling or altering her Will. According to the plaintiff, he had tried to challenge the Will in Civil Suit titled as "Ram Bilas Versus Angoori Devi", however, he was unsuccessful and his application was dismissed on 22.5.2004; that he had filed another application on 17.4.2003, which was dismissed on technical grounds on 22.5.2004; that the defendants No.1 and 2 had sold the disputed property by way of impugned sale deeds and defendant No.3 was having the knowledge with respect to the dispute about the property, however, he had further sold the property to one Shankar Lal son of Ghan Shyam Dass on 28.10.2005 during pendency of the civil suit. Feeling aggrieved the plaintiff had knocked at the door of the Civil Court by way of filing the suit in question.

(3.) On being put to notice, defendants appeared in the Court and offered a contest. In the written statements filed by them, they had raised preliminary objections that the suit was time barred; that the plaintiff had no cause of action to file the same; that the suit was not maintainable; that the plaintiff had no locus standi to bring the suit; that the plaintiff had not approached the Court with clean hands; that the suit had become infructuous; that the suit is bad for non-joinder and misjoinder of the necessary parties; that the suit was barred under Section 34 of Specific Relief Act, 1963. On merits, such defendants controverted the assertions in the plaint though admitting that defendants No.1 and 2 are real brothers of the plaintiff. According to the defendants, the plaintiff had moved applications for amendment, which were dismissed by the Court. The defendants stoutly denied that deceased Smt.Angoori Devi was given a life time interest in the property. According to them Smt.Angoori Devi was competent to execute the Will, which she did and in addition to that had sold a portion of land through registered sale deed; that the plaintiff himself had signed the sale deed as a witness and he was very much aware about the facts of the case; that Smt.Angoori Devi was sole and exclusive owner of the property left by her husband. Refuting the remaining allegations, the defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit.