MILKHI RAM Vs. MILKHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9-3-1989 passed by Additional District Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala whereby the appeal of the defendant was dismissed, thereby the judgment and decree of Sub-Judge Ist Class, Nurpur dated 18-6-1985 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff was affirmed.

(2.) Milkhi Ram (respondent herein) was the plaintiff. Milkhi Ram (appellant herein) was the defendant. Respondent filed a suit based on the premise that he was the legal heir of Punnu deceased and was entitled to claim, withdraw and receive the amount deposited in Co-operative Society Aghar by Punnu deceased and the appellant had no right, title or interest in the estate or in the said amount, as neither he was legal heir nor entitled to the same in any manner. The respondent is claiming himself to be the heir of deceased Punnu being Punnu's mother's brother's son. He pleaded that the appellant was in no way connected with the deceased Punnu. Deceased Punnu son of Gurditta was the last male owner of the disputed land and he died on 1-6-1983 without leaving behind any issue and under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the respondent being the cognate of deceased Punnu, was his legal heir.

(3.) The appellant resisted the suit of the respondent in his written statement. By way of preliminary objections, he pleaded that the respondent had got no cause of action and that the respondent was estopped from filing the suit by his act and conduct and that the suit was bad on account of mis-joinder of causes of action and parties. The suit was not valued properly for the purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction and that the plaint did not contain correct description of the land and lastly that the bank was the necessary party. In reply on merits, it had been admitted that deceased Punnu was the owner of the suit land but the relationship of the respondent with the deceased as disclosed in the plaint had been denied. It had been stated that Ghepli (whose son the respondent claims himself to be) was not married nor the respondent was born out of the wedlock of Ghepli and Smt. Chiri. The appellant asserted himself to be the only agnate / cognate of deceased Punnu.