ASHOK KUMAR Vs. BHAG SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur in Civil Appeal No.10/13 of 2010, dated 15.12.2010.

(2.) Material facts necessary for adjudication of this regular second appeal are that the appellants/plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs - for convenience sake) have instituted a suit for declaration to the effect that they alongwith proforma respondent/defendant (hereinafter referred to as the proforma defendant - for convenience sake) are owners in possession of the suit land being legal heirs of Tulsi Ram of the land to the extent of 21.16 bighas which is half share of the total land measuring 43.12 bighas comprised in Khasra Nos. 23, 25, 27, 28, 31, 34, 53, 54, 75, 76, 157/80, Kittas 11, Khata/Khatauni No.7/8, situate in village Bhagot, Pargana Tiun, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur and further declaration that the Will dated 20.6.2000 alleged to have been executed by Tulsi Ram is wrong, null and void and does not affect the rights of the plaintiffs in the suit land. According to the averments contained in the plaint, Tulsi Ram expired on 18.9.2002. According to them, deceased Tulsi Ram was unable to execute the Will as he was mentally ill due to shock of death of his only daughter, Smt. Rattani Devi. The suit was contested. On merits, it was stated that deceased Tulsi Ram was having one daughter, Rattani Devi and he died leaving behind two widows, namely, Jashodhan Devi and Savitri Devi. Deceased, Tulsi Ram had great love and affection towards Raman and Munish, respondents/defendants No.2 and 3 (hereinafter referred to as defendants No.2 and 3 - for convenience sake). He was looked after by Bhag Singh, father of Raman and Munish. According to the Will, 4 bighas of land situate at Kholiyan in village Bhagot has been given to the sons of Bhag Singh, i.e. defendants No.2 and 3. The trial Court framed the issues. The suit was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No.1, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur on 23.12.2009. The plaintiffs preferred an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur. He dismissed the same on 15.12.2010. Hence, this regular second appeal.

(3.) Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants has strenuously argued that the Will dated 20.6.2000 was surrounded with suspicious circumstances. According to him, the Will has not been duly proved in accordance with law.