SURJIT SINGH Vs. SACHIN RAIZADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed for modification of order dated 31.10.2013, rendered by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Court No. IV, Una in CMA No. 155 of 2013 in Civil Suit No. 30 of 2013.

(2.) KEY facts, necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the respondent -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff for convenience sake) has filed suit for partition of land measuring 1 -69 -22 hectares, as per the details given in the plaint against the petitioner and proforma respondents. The petitioner is father of respondents. The relevant pedigree table as per the plaint is as under:

(3.) THE written statement was filed by the petitioner. A preliminary objection was taken that the suit property was not properly valued for the purpose of court -fee and jurisdiction. The value of the suit is not less than Rs. 2,53,83,000/ - (Two crores fifty three lacs eighty three thousands). It was denied that the parties were governed by the Hindu Mitakshara Law. According to the petitioner, the parties were governed by Hindu Succession Act, 1956. He is the only son, who succeeded to the property from his father under Hindu Succession Act, 1956. It was denied that the property in dispute was coparcenary property. His father has executed a registered "Will" in favour of three sons, including the petitioner. The mutation to this effect was sanctioned in the revenue record vide mutation No. 2018. All the coparceners including the petitioner partitioned the land and mutation to that effect was sanctioned in the revenue record in respect of co -owners including the petitioner and the suit land fell into the share of the petitioner.