BHUPINDER SINGH Vs. SWARANJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dtd. 26/2/2018 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Chandigarh whereby the appeal filed by the appellant/defendant No.1 against the judgment and decree dtd. 23/10/2015 passed by the lower court, has been dismissed.

(2.) In short, the facts of the case are that respondent No.1/plaintiff is the son of late Sh. Bihari Lal and elder brother of appellant/defendant No.1, respondents No.2 and 3/defendants No.2 and 3. Late Sh. Bihari Lal expired on 22/4/2017 intestate, leaving behind immovable and movable properties i.e. House No.358, Sector 16, Panchkula, Booth No.51, Sector 4, Panchkula and an amount of Rs.7,37,518.63 p being balance in his account 1 of 9 No.10445067737 in State Bank of India, Panjab University, Sector 14, Chandigarh. It is submitted that mother of the parties Smt. Leelawanti also expired intestate on 5/5/2007 leaving behind immovable property i.e. House No.230, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh. It is averred that respondent No.1/plaintiff is in physical possession of first floor of House No.358, Sector 16, Panchkula as well as ground and second floors of House No.270, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh and the appellant/defendant No.1 is in physical possession of first floor of House No.230, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh. It is further averred that respondent No.1/plaintiff, appellant/defendant No.1, respondents No.2 and 3/defendants No.2 and 3 are the Class I legal heirs of their deceased parents, as such, they are entitled to 1/4th share of the whole property. It is further submitted that after the death of his father, respondent No.1/plaintiff learnt that his younger brother appellant/defendant No.1 was flaunting a fake and forged Will and intended to get some property transferred from their late father to himself behind the back of other class I heirs of the deceased. Then, respondent No.1/plaintiff wrote a letter dtd. 18/6/2007 to the Estate Officer, Panchkula intimating him that respondent No.1/plaintiff being the eldest son of the deceased was a Class I heir and as such, entitled to his due share in the property. On receipt of the said letter, the Estate Officer refused to transfer the property. Thereafter, a family settlement was done in November 2008 in which decision was taken that respondent No.1/plaintiff will withdraw his letter dtd. 18/6/2007 and facilitate the transfer of property, as stated above. However, after the said property was transferred to the name of appellant/defendant No.1 by the Estate Officer, Urban Estate, Panchkula, he went back on his word and 2 of 9 instead of vacating the first floor of House No.230, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh, he staked his claim to 1/4th share of the said house. Hence, the present suit.

(3.) Upon notice, the appellant/defendant No.1 appeared and filed his written statement contesting the present suit stating therein that the present suit is not maintainable and respondent No.1/plaintiff has not come come to the court with clean hands, as he has concealed the true and material facts from the court. It is further averred that late Sh. Bihari Lal executed a valid registered Will dtd. 3/2/2006, vide which he bequeathed his property i.e. House No.358, Sector 16, Panchkula and Booth No.51, Sector 4, Panchkula in his favour. It is submitted that appellant/defendant No.1 is in physical possession of first floor of House No.230, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh. It is further submitted that the property bearing House No.358, Sector 16, Panchkula had already been re-allotted to the appellant/defendant No.1 prior to the withdrawal of letter dtd. 18/6/2007 and the other property i.e. Booth No.51, Sector 4, Urban Estate, Panchkula was also re-allotted to him. It is stated that as per Hindu Succession Act, 1956, all the legal heirs have equal right to the property of the deceased. Remaining averments were categorically denied.