TIKAM RAM Vs. BESRU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant has prayed for the following relief:- "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that after calling the record of the Learned Trial Court and Learned First Appellate Court and hearing the parties, the instant Regular Second Appeal may kindly be accepted and impugned judgment and decree dtd. 30/11/2023 in Civil Appeal No.27/2023 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kullu, whereby appeal preferred by the appellant/ plaintiff was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by Learned Civil Judge Manali, District Kullu dtd. 31/5/2023 in Civil Suit No.417/2013 and Counter-Claim Suit No.135/2023/2013 was affirmed, may kindly be set aside and the Civil Suit be decreed in favour of the appellant/ plaintiff while the counter claim suit be dismissed and set aside."

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are that the appellant, namely, Shri Tikam Ram filed a suit for declaration alongwith consequential relief of injunction against the defendants, on the ground that the plaintiff was owner in possession of the suit land, deceased Kamli Devi was married to Hari Chand and plaintiff as well as defendants No.3 to 5 were their children as well as their successors as per Hindu Succession Act. According to the plaintiff, after the demise of Hari Chand, Smt. Kamli Devi being mother became head of the family and sons and daughters of Smt. Kamli Devi were residing with her. The suit land was being cultivated jointly from the time of their father. The plaintiff being eldest son of Hari Chand had constructed a house as also cow sheds over the suit land. Defendant No.1 (their mother) was an illiterate and old lady. In order to userp the rights of the plaintiff a family settlement was executed in favour of defendants No.2 and 3, taking undue advantage of old age of defendant No.1 and the suit was thus filed seeking declaration that family settlement so executed was bad in law alongwith relief of injunction.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants, who also filed a counter-claim to the effect that they were joint owners in possession of the suit land, whereas non-counter claimant/plaintiff was a stranger thereto, who had no right, title or interest over it and accordingly, none-counter claimant/plaintiff be restrained from causing any interference over the suit land. In terms of the judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge, Manali, District Kullu, H.P. dtd. 31/5/2023, the suit was dismissed, whereas the counter- claimed was decreed. Feeling aggrieved, the plaintiff preferred a composite single appeal against rejection of the plaint and decreeing of the counter-claim.