BAHADUR SINGH Vs. BHAGI RATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant-Defendant has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 10.9.1993 passed by the learned District Judge, Hamirpur.

(2.) Brief facts are that Respondent-Plaintiff Bhagi Rath (hereinafter referred as 'the Plaintiff') instituted a suit for declaration that he is the owner in possession of one half share in land comprising khata khatauni No. 4/4, Khasra Nos. 212, 213, 222, 324, 326, 327, 328, 341, 344, 354, 398, 425, 437, 508, 547, 548, 550, 607, 608 and 824 Kita 20 measuring 46 Kanals 9 Marias, 5588/69120th share in land comprising khata khatauni No. 120/129, khasra No. 336 measuring 10 marlas, 3120/153600th share in land comprising khata khatauni No. 121/130 khasra No. 414 measuring 9 marlas 27160/460800th share in the land comprising khata khatauni No. 122/131 khasra No. 244 measuring 10 kanals 14 marlas as specified in the jamabandi for the year 1980-81 situate in Tika Mohin, Tappa Bajuri, and the land comprising khata khatauni No. 97/199, khasra numbers 128, 295 measuring 423.42 sq. mts. and khata khatauni No. 98/200 previous khasra Nos. 244, 245, 315, 1251, 1252 and 1258 measuring 1652.78 sq. mts. as shown in the jamabandi for the year 1982-83 situate in Tika Up Mahal Baru, Mauza Bajuri, tehsil and District Hamirpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit land') on the basis of Will dated 27.4.1975 executed by the previous owner Smt. Shanti Devi in his favour and the Defendant has got no right or title to the suit land and therefore, she be restrained by way of permanent injunction from interfering with the possession of the Plaintiff in any manner whatsoever.

(3.) Case of the Plaintiff as made out in the plaint is that Smt. Shanti was the real Aunt (Tai) of the Plaintiff and was residing with him and he used to maintain her and to provide her all amenities of life. She executed a valid Will on 27.4.1975 in favour of the Plaintiff when she was of disposing mind. On the death of said Smt. Shanti Devi all her rites were performed by the Plaintiff and the suit land is in the exclusive possession of the Plaintiff. A litigation however regarding mutation of inheritance is pending before the Financial Commissioner Himachal Pradesh. The Defendant without any right is interfering with the possession of the Plaintiff and despite request of the Plaintiff to acknowledge the Will and not interfere with the possession of the Plaintiff the Defendant started interfering in the possession. Hence, the suit.