RAGHUNATH SINGH Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Collector dated 18. 11. 1976 (Annex. 6), Revenue Appellate Authority dated 12. 4. 1982 (Annex. 7) and Board of Revenue dated 9. 12. 1982 and 20. 12. 1982 (Annex. 9 and 10 ).

(2.) IT is stated that one Thakur Ram Singh son of Thakur Kishan Singh, resident of village Bhankhari Tehsil Rajgarh, real uncle of the petitioner had bequeathed all his properties (movable of immovable) in favour of the petitioner by a registered will dated 26. 11. 1965. The testator died on 9. 1. 1996. Mutation of the agricultural lands comprising of Khasra Nos. 42, 44, 46 and 48 was also sanctioned in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel of the parties, I am of the opinion that there is substance and merit in the argument made by the counsel for the petitioner. The `will' being relied upon was a subject matter in the judgment dated 15. 1. 1973. It was so proved in the court of Munsiff by the attesting witnesses and also by the scribe. So far the execution of the will is concerned, finality had been attached to it and if in parallel or subsequent proceedings the decree as such is relied upon where the will had been so proved as having been executed, it is binding on all the other courts as a final judgment. The Revenue Board had erred in saying that once a `will' has been proved in accordance with law and has become a part of the judgment, the `will' is to be time and again proved in all other proceedings as well. If this argument is accepted, there would be no end to the litigation. May be in a given case a `will' or document is proved in accordance with law in a given suit; validity and the legality of the will or the document has become final and in subsequent suit there is hardly any necessity to prove the same document once again between the same parties, it will lead to anomalous position, situation and uncertainty. The will once proved to be genuine `will' and proved in accordance with law in one case; the same will can be interpreted or commented upon differently by the different court resulting to different results. Principles of resjudicata are applicable in such situation for a document having been proved between the same parties.