RAKESH KUMAR Vs. MANGAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Regular Second Appeal filed by the appellants/ plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Una, (H.P.), dated 19.3.2001, affirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Sub Judge, Ist Class, Court No.II, Una dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs for declaration.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the original plaintiff Smt. Ram Piari, now represented by her L.Rs., the appellants, hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiffs', filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she was owner in possession of the property marked by letters ABCD shown in red colour in the site plan attached with the plaint, comprised in Khasra No.1759 (old 3237). It was alleged by the plaintiff that the suit property was earlier owned by Smt. Ram Rakhi, who had executed a valid Will in favour of Smt. Ram Piari on 22.4.1971. The order of the Settlement Officer dated 25.4.1987 was also challenged being wrong, illegal and void. The prayer was also made that the defendants be restrained from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff over the suit land. It was alleged that the defendants had got an order dated 25.7.1985 passed by the Settlement Officer, Dharamshala in their favour and mutation No.7932 dated Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 29.8.1987 was got sanctioned in their favour, which was also challenged. Defendants contested the suit and pleaded that no Will was executed by the deceased, which is forged and fabricated document and defendants are owner in possession in the suit land and as such the order passed by the Settlement Officer was incorrect and illegal.

(3.) AFTER hearing the parties, the learned trial Court vide its impugned judgment decided Issue Nos. 1 and 2, as against the plaintiff and in favour of the defendants and consequently, dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.