RAMJU DEVI Vs. PREM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs -appellants against the judgment and decree dated 15.11.1994, passed by the learned District Judge Kangra at Dharamsala, vide which the appeal filed by the defendant was allowed,, the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court were set aside and the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed. 2.The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present appeal are that the plaintiffs -appellants had filed a suit for declaration against Prem Chand defendant, with the allegations that the Will dated 9.6.1988, allegedly executed by Johanda Ram deceased in favour of the defendant, was a forged and fraudulent document and mutation No. 195, attested on 14.9.1988, on the basis of said Will, was also null and void and the plaintiffs were the owners in possession of their respective shares in the suit land, as detailed in the plaint. It was alleged that Johanda Ram had died on 30.6.1988 and that plaintiff No.1 was his widow while plaintiffs No.2 to 5 were his daughters, whereas the defendant was the son of Johanda Ram deceased. It was alleged that the defendant had set up the Will dated 9.6.1988, allegedly executed by Johanda Ram in favour of the defendant. It was alleged that infact Johanda Ram deceased had never executed the said Will in favour of the defendant and in the alternative if it as found that the said Will was executed by him, then on account of his old age and falling health, he was not in a sound disposing mind. It was further alleged that the suit property was ancestral and could not be willed away.

(2.) ln the written statement, the defendant alleged that the Will in question was legal and valid and denied that it was the result of fraud or forgery. On the other hand, it was pleaded that the said Will was executed by said Johanda Ram deceased of his own sweet will in favour of the defendant who was the only son of Johanda Ram deceased.

(3.) Replication was filed. Various issues were framed, including issue No.1 with regard to the validity of the Will dated 9.6.1988, allegedly executed by Johanda Ram in favour of the defendant. Both the sides led evidence in support of their respective contentions. After hearing both sides and perusing the record, the learned trial Court decreed the. suit of the plaintiffs and the Will dated 9.6.1988, executed by Johanda Ram deceased in favour of the defendant, was declared as forged and fraudulent and the subsequent mutation, on the basis of the said Will, was also declared as null and void and the plaintiffs were declared owners in possession of their respective shares in the suit land, as per decree. However the appeal filed by Prem Chand defendant was allowed, the judgment and decree of the trial Court were set aside and the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed holding that Johanda Ram deceased had executed a valid Will in favour of Prem Chand defendant in respect of the suit land and the mutation of inheritance sanctioned in favour of the defendant was also legal and valid. Resultantly, the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed. Aggrieved against the same, the plaintiffs filed present Regular Second Appeal in this Court.