JIUNU Vs. KASHMIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 5.7.2001 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi in Civil Appeal No.107 of 1996.

(2.) MATERIAL facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondent -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff ' for convenience sake) filed a suit for declaration and injunction. According to the plaintiff, Dagu Ram was owner in possession of the land as per details given in paras 1 (a) to 1 (e) of the plaint. He executed "will" in favour of plaintiff and appellants -defendants (hereinafter referred to as 'defendants ' for convenience sake) on 4.9.1986; vide Ex. PA whereby he has bequeathed his entire share in the land in equal shares. Mutation to this effect was attested on 21.4.1989 in favour of the parties. Defendants got manipulated a forged and fictitious "will" Ex. DC dated 1.8.1988 in connivance with the Patwaris, namely, Neel Mani and Lachhman Singh. According to the "will" dated 1.8.1988, plaintiff was given 1/8th share and 7/8th share was given to the defendants from the landed property of Dagu. According to the plaintiff, Dagu never executed will Ex. DC dated 1.8.1988.

(3.) MR . Lovneesh Kanwar, on the basis of substantial questions of law framed, has strenuously argued that both the courts below have misread and mis -appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the parties. According to him, 'will ' dated 1.8.1988 has been validly executed and the 'will ' dated 4.9.1986 was cancelled by late Sh. Dagu Ram.