TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J. - (1.) DEFENDANT-appellant Reshmi is in second appeal before this Court.
(2.) PLAINTIFFS filed a suit seeking a declaration and joint possession as a consequential relief that they are owners of the suit land to the extent of 14/24 share i.e. 7/24 share each as daughters of Budha. Briefly, it was stated that Budha (now deceased) was owner in possession of the land, details of which were furnished in para 1 of the plaint situated in village Bilochpur and village Hafjabad Majra, Bilochpur. Upon his death, Reshmi the daughter of Budha from his first wife had filed a suit setting up a Will of Budha and the same had been struck down by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon in appeal, who had declared defendants no.2 and 3 i.e. widows of Budha to be owners of 1/8th share, whereas defendant no.1 was held to be owner of 7/8th share. PLAINTIFFS stated that they were also daughters of Budha and were thus entitled to inherit his estate. It was against such brief factual backdrop to claim their share of inheritance that the suit for declaration and joint possession was instituted. Defendant no.1 i.e. the present appellant contested the suit and denied the allegations and assertions made by the plaintiffs and stated that she is the only daughter of Budha. Upon the respective pleadings of the parties, following issues were struck:- "1. Whether the plaintiffs are daughters of the late Shri Budha son of Fatoo; if so to what effect?OPP. 2. Whether the plaintiffs inherited the lands and properties left by late Budha to the extent of 60/24 share as alleged?OPD. 3.Whether the plaintiffs are estopped from filing the present suit by their act and conduct?OPD. 4. Whether the suit is barred by the principle of resjudicata?OPD. 5. Whether Budha deceased executed a valid will dated 2.10.1976 in favour of defendant no.1 if so to what effect?OPD. 6. Whether the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the present suit?OPD. 7. Relief." The Trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiffs and held the plaintiffs to be daughters of late Budha son of Fatoo and they were held entitled to the extent of 14/24 share i.e. 7/24 share each in respect of the land and property left by late Budha and which was wrongly allotted to defendant no.1, Reshmi. Being aggrieved Reshmi, defendant-appellant preferred a civil appeal and vide judgement dated 20.7.1984 the Additional District Judge, Faridabad affirmed the findings of the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Resultantly, defendant-appellant is in second appeal before this Court.
(3.) I have heard Mr. R.S. Sihota learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. O.P. Goyal learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents at length.;