LAWS(HPH)-2026-4-13

SHIV DAYAL Vs. KANSHI RAM

Decided On April 09, 2026
SHIV DAYAL Appellant
V/S
KANSHI RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 10/1/2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) vide which the judgment and decree dtd. 30/11/2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Chachiot at Gohar, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were set aside. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiffs filed a civil suit before the learned Trial Court seeking a declaration that the Wills dtd. 20/3/2007 and 11/4/2007 stated to have been executed by Dharam Chand were null and void, which had no binding effect upon the plaintiffs ' rights. A decree for possession was also sought in case the defendants succeeded in forcibly dispossessing the plaintiffs. A consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering in the suit land described in para 1 of the plaint was also sought.

(3.) It was asserted that the suit land was owned and possessed by Dharam Chand, who was the plaintiffs ' cousin. Purshottam, plaintiffs ' father, and Moti Ram, father of the deceased Dharam Chand, were real brothers. The plaintiffs used to look after Dharam Chand and supply him with all the necessities of life. The defendants propounded two Wills dtd. 20/3/2007 and 11/4/2007, stated to have been executed by Dharam Chand in their favour. The plaintiffs, being a relative of Dharam Chand, were entitled to inherit the suit land. The plaintiffs are in possession of the suit land, and the defendants threatened to interfere with his possession based on the Will. Hence, the suit was filed to seek the relief mentioned above.