GUMAT RAM Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs are the appellants, who filed a suit for declaration and injunction, which was allowed by the learned trial Court, however, the said judgment and decree was reversed by the learned appellate Court, constraining them to file the instant appeal. (Parties hereinafter referred to as the 'Plaintiffs' and 'Defendant').

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and injunction as a consequential relief with the allegations that the defendant Smt. Dhani Devi was not the widow of late Swaru, son of Sewak, and therefore, the mutation No. 405, dated 08.08.1994 had wrongly been attested in her favour whereby the share of deceased Swaru in land bearing Khata Khatauni No. 98/178 and 179, Kitta 28, measuring 8-3-11 bigha and the land comprised in khata/khatauni No. 99/180, kitta 2, measuring 0-11-13 bigha situated in village Dari/47, Illaka Kohalu, Tehsil Chachiot, District Mandi, had been entered in her favour. It was averred that deceased Raud was the real brother of deceased Swaru, the father of the plaintiffs and, therefore, the mutation ought to have been entered in the name of Raud.

(3.) The defendant filed written statement wherein it was alleged that the plaintiffs were not the legal heirs of Swaru as it was the defendant who was his legally wedded wife. The trial Court on 23.05.1995, framed the following issues:-