GULZARI RAM Vs. LEKH RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant - defendant No. 1/Gulzari Ram is aggrieved of judgment and decree dtd. 14/6/1997 passed by the learned District Judge, Hoshiarpur whereby judgment and decree dtd. 15/2/1994 passed by the learned Sub Judge IInd Class, Hoshiarpur has been set aside. Consequently suit for declaration filed by the plaintiffs (respondents No. 1 to 3) has been decreed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the case are that plaintiffs - respondent Lekh Raj son of Kaudu Ram, Kehar Singh, Rattan Chand sons of Maru Ram filed a suit for declaration that the plaintiffs alongwith defendant No. 2 Hans Raj son of Maru Ram were joint owners in possession of the land as detailed in the plaint and as per jamabandi for the year 1987-88. It was pleaded that Nihal Singh had four sons namely Kirpa Ram, Maru Ram, Mal Ram and Kaudu Ram. Kirpa Ram had one son Gulzari Ram (appellant - defendant No. 1). Maru Ram had three sons Kehar Singh, Rattan Chand (plaintiffs No. 2 and 3) and Hans Raj (defendant No. 2). Mal Ram had one son Daulat Ram who died issueless on 27/10/1990. Kaudu Ram had one son Lekh Raj (plaintiff No. 1). It was further stated that Daulat Ram was owner of substantial share in the suit land. He did not leave behind any class I heir on his death on 27/10/1990. The plaintiffs and the defendants, it was pleaded, being first cousins were entitled to succeed to the share of property of Daulat Ram in equal share i.e. 1/5th share each. Defendant No. 1 - Gulzari Lal, it was stated, set up an invalid will in his favour on the basis of which land was wrongly mutated in his name. Plaintiffs stated that they did not admit the execution and validity of the Will, if any, in favour of the defendant No. 1 - appellant. Mutation on the basis of the said Will was also pleaded to be illegal and not binding on the rights of the plaintiffs, who were claimed to be joint owners in possession of the suit land. When defendants refused to admit their claim, suit was filed.

(3.) Upon notice, the suit was contested only by defendant No. 1 - appellant/Gulzari Lal. All the other defendants were proceeded against exparte. Various preliminary objections were raised in the written statement filed by defendant No.1. Averments on merits were controverted. Pedigree table furnished by the plaintiffs was controverted on the ground that Maru Ram had a daughter - Vidya Devi, who was succeeded by her two sons and two daughters. Kirpa Ram had a daughter as well. While admitting that Daulat Ram died issueless not leaving behind any class I heir on 27/10/1990, it was pleaded that Daulat Ram used to reside with Gulzari Lal (defendant No. 1) and was served by him. Daulat Ram was enlisted as a voter and ration card holder in the family of defendant No. 1. In lieu of the services rendered and out of love and affection, Daulat Ram executed a registered will dtd. 31/5/1974 in favour of Gulzari Ram, bequeathing his entire property in his favour. Last rites of Daulat Ram were also performed by defendant No. 1. Affidavit dtd. 18/10/1990 was also executed by Gulzari Ram. Suit land was mutated in favour of Gulzari Ram (defendant No. 1 - appellant). Dismissal of the suit was prayed for.