NAND LAL AND ANR. Vs. KHILLIAN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Defendant's appeal against the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, who on 16th January, 1968, allowed the appeal of the Plaintiffs Respondents and decreed their suit for possession of agricultural land situate in village Tekli, tahsil and district Gurgaon.

(2.) BHOOP Singh was the owner of the suit land and he died in the year 1927 leaving behind a son Siri Chand, two daughters Mst. Khillian and Mst. Basanti who are Plaintiffs in this suit, and Mrt. Ghogan widow of his pre -deceased son Hira. Defendants Appellants claim to be collaterals of the deceased in fourth degree. On the death of Bhoop Singh, his estate was mutated by way of inheritance, one -half in favour of Siri Chand and the other half in favour of Mst. Ghogan. Siri Chand later died somewhere in the year 1927 and his share was mutated in the name of his mother Mst. Sukh Devi, widow of Bhoop Singh, deceased. Mst. Sukh Devi also died afterwards and on her death, the share of the estate of BhcGp Singh held by her was mutated in the name of Mst. Ghogan with the result that Mst. Ghogan held the entire estate of Bhoop Singh deceased in the year 1951. Mst. Ghogan died on 8th November, 1962, and the Plaintiffs Respondents claiming to be daughters of Bhoop Singh filed the present suit on 20th October, 1964, for possession of the land described in the plaint which at one time was held by Bhoop Singh. It was pleaded by them that Bhoop Singh, their father, was owner in possession of the suit -land and he was succeeded on his death by Mst. Ghogan, widow of Hira, his pre -deceased son, who took the life estate. It was alleged that on the death of Mst. Ghogan, the Plaintiffs, being the daughters of Bhoop Singh, were lawful heirs and owners of the land in dispute and that mutation had also been sanctioned in their favour. It was denied that Defendants were collaterals of Bhoop Singh deceased and the plea was that even if they were collaterals, they could not succeed in preference to the Plaintiffs. The Defendants Appellants resisted the suit. It was denied by them that the Plaintiffs were daughters of Bhoop Singh. Bhoop Singh, according to the Defendants, was not succeeded by Mst. Ghogan as his heir. It was pleaded that Siri Chand alone being the son was an heir of Bhoop Singh and after his death the Defendants were in possession of the land in their own right as reversioners. It was also denied that the Plaintiffs were heirs. The plea that Mst. Ghogan, widow of Hira pre -deceased son of Bhoop Singh took a life estate, as alleged in para 2 of the plaint was not specifically referred to in the written statement though the allegations were generally denied. The Defendants also claimed title by way of adverse possession. Pleadings of the parties led to the following issues being struck by the trial Court:

(3.) AN appeal was preferred by the Plaintiffs and the same was allowed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, who decreed the suit. It was held by him that Mst. Ghogan being in possession of the suit land when the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the Act), came into force, became an absolute owner thereof by virtue of Section 14(1) of the Act and the Plaintiffs being preferential heirs were entitled to a decree for possession against the Defendants Appellants. Hence the present Appeal.