Vyom Prakash Gupta, J. - (1.)This regular second appeal has been filed by defendant against the judgment and decree dated 8-6-1979 of District Judge, Hamirpur, by which the learned District Judge accepted the appeal of the plaintiffs-respondents and decreed the suit of the plaintiffs/respondents for possession of the disputed property.
(2.)The brief facts are that plaintiffs (respondents Nos. 1 to 6) filed a suit for declaration with respect to the property detailed in the plaint to the effect that they are the owners and in possession of the suit property and in the alternative they prayed for possession of the disputed property. The suit was originally filed in the Court of the Sub Judge, Hamirpur on 31-10-1968 on the allegations that one Gajjan Singh son of Shri Ranu was the owner of the suit land and he died on 26-6-1963 leaving behind the plaintiff No. 1 as his daughter, plaintiff No. 2 as his widow, and plaintiffs Nos. 3 to 6 as sons and daughters of his predeceased daughter Gian Devi. It was further stated that defendant/appellant Braham Raj Singh and the other defendant Samraj Singh (respondent No. 7) are not the sons/relations of the deceased Gajjan Singh and they have no right to the property of Gajjan Singh deceased. It was further alleged that the aforesaid two defendants are asserting that the deceased Gajjan Singh had made a gift of a part of his property in their favour in the year 1950, but in fact no such gift was ever made by deceased Gajjan Singh. In the alternative it was prayed that if any gift is proved to have been made, then the same was a paper transaction only and Gajjan Singh remained in possession of the property and after the death of Gajjan Singh, plaintiffs re-mained in possession of this property and as such they have acquired title to the same by adverse possession. The plaintiffs further claimed that the defendants are threatening to interfere with the peaceful ownership and possession of the plaintiffs claiming the property by gift as well as by inheritance on the ground that they are the sons of the deceased Gajjan Singh.
(3.)Samraj Singh defendant No. 1 filed his written statement on 5-6-1969 and admitted the claim of the plaintiffs but the present appellant, Braham Raj Singh who was defendant No. 2 denied the plaintiff's claim and pleaded that he is the son of Gajjan Singh deceased and has a right to inherit his property. It was further stated that the said Gajjan Singh had rightly gifted away his property in the year 1950 regarding which a mutation has also been sanctioned vide mutation No. 304.
;