JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Heard learned counsel for
the appellant.
(2.) This is the plaintiff's second appeal arising
out of suit for cancellation of will deed executed
by one Sher Gir in favour of his daughter
Smt. Sheela Devi. The Suit No. 42 of 1992, has
been dismissed vide judgment and decree
dated 03.04.2007 and the appeal filed by the
plaintiff / appellant has also been dismissed
vide judgment and order dated 16.11.2010.
Hence, the present second appeal.
(3.) The brief facts, as stated in the plaint, are that
parties are descendant of one Phool Gir. It appears
that Sher Gir, who was the son of Phool
Gir, has executed a will in favour of his daughter,
as he was having no son. The plaintiff / appellant
claimed that during his life time the executor
of the will was living with him and the
property was being maintained by the family
members. The appellant was looking after his
welfare and he has not executed any will deed
in his life time. Legally, according to Section
171 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land
Reforms Act, 1950, the appellant is the legal
heir and he can only inherit the property. After
marriage, defendant No.1 went with her husband
and she has got no concern with the property
in dispute. It was in the month of March
1991, he came to know that a will was executed
on 18.01.1989. Legally, Sher Gir was not having
any right to execute said will, therefore, it
may be treated to be a forged document. He has
never visited the registration office and in case
any will is there that cannot be said to be executed
on his own free will. It was also pleaded
in the plaint that the appellant is in possession
of the property in dispute and, therefore, the
defendants may be restrained from interfering
in the possession of the property in question.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.