SHRI BANSI LAL, SON OF SHRI LAL CHAND, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BASHLA, TEHSIL ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P. Vs. PREM CHAND, SON OF SHRI BHAJAN DASS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BASHLA, TEHSIL ROHRU, DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been directed against the judgment, decree dated 12.06.2000 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Shimla, Camp at Rohru, in Civil Appeal No. 65 -S/13 of 1999, affirming judgment, decree, dated 02.08.1999 passed by learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Court No. 1, Rohru, in Civil Suit No. 202/1 of 1994. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant had filed a suit for declaration against respondent No. 1 and others that Keshav Ram died issueless, mutation No. 10 dated 18.04.1981 and mutation No. 58 dated 20.07.1989 are wrong, illegal. The appellant and proforma respondents are entitled to inherit the estate of Keshav Ram. The further pleaded case of the appellant is that one Lal Chand had three sons namely Keshav Ram, Bhajan Dass, Bansi Lal plaintiff and two daughters namely Shiv Dei and Juin Devi. Keshav Ram died issueless. The respondent No. 1 was never adopted by Keshav Ram. The adoption did not take place either according to custom or in accordance with law. The mutations No. 10 and 58 were attested behind the back of the appellant. The mutations No. 10 and 58 are liable to be declared null and void.

(2.) THE respondent No. 1 contested the suit by filing written statement. The objections of maintainability, limitation and estoppel were taken as preliminary objections. On merits, it has been pleaded that Keshav Ram and his wife Tipsi legally adopted respondent No. 1. On the death of Keshav Ram, mutation No. 10 was rightly attested in favour of respondent No. 1 and Tipsi and on the death of Tipsi mutation No. 58 was rightly attested in favour of respondent No. 1. The prayer was made for dismissal of the suit. The replication was filed by appellant wherein he reiterated the stand taken in the plaint. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: -

(3.) WHETHER the suit is not maintainable as alleged? OPD.