MT PARVIN KUMARI Vs. GOKAL CHAND RALA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first appeal from a decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Kangra at Dharamsala, dismissing the plaintiff's suit for a declaration that he was the lawful heir of Mt. Ram Piari, his deceased wife, and as such was entitled to the suit property left by her and also for possession of the movable property, the lands, the house and the khola mentioned in Caluse 1 to S of the heading of the plaint.

(2.) The suit property belonged to Mt. Ram Piari mother of Parwin Kumari alias Usha Rani minor,defendant 1. Sh. Raj Kumari defendants, is not in any way related to Usha Rani or plaintiff Gokal Chand, but the father of Mt. Ram Piari was in her employment as a Chaukidar and lived at Holta Tea Estate near Palampur which belongs to Sh. Raj Kumari. The plaintiff is a Rajput and hails from a village in the district of Hoshiarpur. He is now employed in the office of the District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, and resides in Hoshiarpur town.

(3.) His allegations in brief were that, he was married to Mt. Ram Piari according to Hindu rites at Holta Tea Estate in 1920-21, that after the marriage he and Mt. Ram Piari lived together as husband and wife till 1932, when Mt. Ram Piari was taken away by Sh. Raj Kumari to Palam. pur, that Mt. Usha Rani was begotten by Ram Piari of him and she is his legitimate daughter and that on Mt. Ram Piari's death the property left by her descended to him as her heir according to the custom by which his family was governed. It was also alleged by the plaintiff that though Mt. Ram Piari came to him at Hoshiarpur for a few days in 1936, she practically spent the whole period from 1932, when she went away with Sh. Raj Kumari, to a short time before her death, which took place in 1941 at Palampore. The reason why Sh. Raj Kumari was impleaded as a defendant in the suit was, that according to the plaintiff, she had taken possession of the movable and immovable property of Mt, Ram Piari and in the course of the proceedings that he started under Section 192, Succession Act she put forward the plea that Mt. Ram Piari had made a will whereby she had appointed Sh. Raj Kumari the guardian of her minor daughter.