BAAN SINGH Vs. DEVI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional, Sirmaur at Nahan dated 20.10.2001 whereby he partly allowed the appeal of the defendants.

(2.) Respondents 1&2 Devi Ram and Bhajju filed a suit against Ghassi Ram and Telu Ram (predecessors-ininterest of the present appellants) and Smt.Chandno respondent No.3 herein was the proforma defendant. In the suit it was claimed that the plaintiffs Devi Ram and Bhajju and proforma defendant Chandno were the real brothers and sister of Mohi Ram. They were the children of Kalia from his second wife Juno Devi. It was alleged that prior to his marriage with Juno Devi, Kalia was married to one Jhungri and Ghasi Ram, defendant No.1, was born out of this wed-lock. The case of the plaintiffs, in short, was that since their brother Mohi Ram had died issueless, the plaintiffs alongwith defendant No.2 Telu Ram and Chandno who were the real brothers and sister of Mohi Ram alone were entitled to succeed to the estate of Mohi Ram. However, Ghasi Ram and Telu Ram had in connivance with the revenue staff got the estate of Mohi Ram attested in their favour vide Mutation No.660 dated 4.6.1994 and Mutation No.1525 dated 11.6.1993. According to the defendants, Mohi Ram, Telu and Ghasi Ram were 'joridar' brothers having a common wife Dharmi. They claimed that in accordance with the custom in 'joridara' system it is the joridar brothers who inherit the estate of the deceased and the estate is not succeeded according to the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act.

(3.) The learned trial Court held that the custom stood abrogated after coming into force the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and since admittedly the so called marriage with Dharmi had taken place after 1969, there could be no valid polyandrous marriage. On facts also, it was held that, in fact, Dharmi was not the wife of Mohi Ram. Therefore, the suit of the plaintiffs was decreed and a decree for declaration was granted that the plaintiffs and defendants 2&3 alone are entitled to succeed the estate of Mohi Ram in equal shares. The defendants were also permanently restrained from interfering in the rights of the plaintiffs.