SMT. VEENA Vs. MOOL CHAND GAUTAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff -petitioners filed suit for partition of the plot in dispute against the defendants -respondents. In the written statement filed by the respondents, they have alleged that Jag Ram had three sons namely Amar Singh, Attar Singh and Chattar Singh and after his death all the three sons inherited the property left by Jag Ram. The petitioners in their replications denied the share of Chattar Singh in the plot in question. The petitioners moved application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the replication. By way of proposed amendment; petitioners wanted to plea and explain the status of Chatter Singh in their family. The petitioners have stated that in facts Chattar Singh is not son of Jag Ram and the real facts are the Jag Ram was married to Smt.Sarti Devi and from that wedlock, two sons namely Amar Singh and Attar Singh and one daughter named Smt.Gindori were born. Smt. Sarti Devi expired in the year, 1937. After the death of Sarti Devi, Jag Ram brought one woman namely Ganga Devi alongwith her son Chattar Singh some where in 1941 -42 to his house and started keeping her as his concubine and her son Chattar Singh as Gaillad (pichhlag). It was sought to be pleaded that said Chattar Singh was neither the son of Jag Ram nor was he ever treated as son by Jag Ram and as such the question of inheriting the property of Jag Ram by Chattar Singh did not arise. It is stated in this application for amendment that this factual position was brought by them to the notice of their counsel Sh.J.K.Maheshwari, Advocate while he was preparing replications and he was instructed to deny the allegations of Chattar Singh being the son of Jag Ram. When they engaged Sh.Sunder Lal Garg, Advocate in, supersession of Sh. J.K.Maheshwari Advocate, it was brought to their notice by Sh.Sunder Lal, Advocate that the fact that Chattar Singh was not the son of Jag Ram and was a pichhlag brought by Smt.Ganga Devi with her when she came to his fold as the concubine of Jag Ram after the death of Smt.Sarti Devi is conspicuously missing in the replications.

(2.) Vide order dated 5.6.1999, Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Gurgaon declined this prayer of the defendants for amendment of the replications.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.