TEKU Vs. JOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants appeal against the judgment and decree passed on May 3, 1984, by District Judge, Mandi Kullu, Lahaul and Spiti Districts allowing the plaintiffs appeal and granting him a decree as prayed in the suit and thereby reversing the judgment and decree passed on May 25, 1982 by Senior Sub -Judge, Kullu, dismissing the plaintiffs suit.

(2.) At the very outset, it may be stated that the suit, out of which the present appeal has arisen, was instituted on June 3, 1978, after coming into force of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976 but no substantial question of law was formulated. Toe learned Counsel for the appellants, however, at the time of hearing of appeal urged that the substantial question of law arising for determination is as to whether the attending circumstances, including the incorrect description of the plaintiff -respondent in the Will Ex. PW 3/A are sufficient to conclude that execution thereof is shrouded with suspicious circumstances.

(3.) In order to appreciate the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties addressed on the question as formulated above, it will be profitable to make reference to the pleadings and evidence on record. Plaintiff by filing suit claimed a decree for possession of 2 bighas 4 biswas of land alleging that the same was owned and possessed by one Smt. Kishni widow of Lallu to which she had acquired title through her father Shukru. He bad been looking after and maintaining Kishni his grand -mother in distant relationship after the death of her husband, to whom also he had been looking after and maintaining He alone had performed their last rites and borne the entire expenses of the same Keeping in view the fact that he had looked after and maintained her and also helped her in agricultural pursuits, she {Smt Kishni) on December 11, 1970 had gifted away some of her property in his favour by means of a registered deed of gift and for the remaining property, on the same day a Will was executed by her bequeathing the same in his favour which Will was also got registered by her. One Abli, raised a dispute as regards the property gifted in his favour and ultimately the matter was earned to a civil court by filing civil suit No 58 of 1973 and then a compromise was duly arrived at between him and Abli After the death of Kishni, mutation of inheritence to her estate, on the basis of registered Will, was got entered in the revenue records but the revenue officer on highly flimsy ground -that he was not correctly described in the Will, instead of attesting mutation on the basis of Will bad attested the same in favour of the defendants. It was contended by him that due to some inadvertent mistake he was not correctly described in the Will but infact it was he alone in whose favour the property had been bequeathed by the deceased on the basis of the Will. Besides challenging the mutation, he claimed decree for possession thereof. The suit was contested by the defendants on merits as well as on other legal grounds.