Paramjit Singh Patwalia, J. - (1.) INSTANT regular second appeal has been preferred by the appellants -defendants against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Charkhi Dadri whereby suit filed by the respondents/plaintiffs for declaration has been partly decreed, as well as, against the judgment and decree dated 12.09.2012 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Bhiwani whereby two appeals, one preferred by the appellants/defendants and another by respondents/plaintiffs, have been dismissed. Along with this second appeal, a Civil Misc. Application viz. CM No. 6872 -C of 2014 for condonation of 531 days' delay in filing the appeal has also been filed.
(2.) FOR convenience sake, hereinafter parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Court of first instance. The detailed facts are already recapitulated in the judgments of the Courts below and are not required to be reproduced. However, brief facts relevant for disposal of this second appeal are that plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration challenging thereby judgment and decree dated 08.01.1991 passed in Civil Suit No. 918 of 1991 titled as "Hari Kishan and others versus Bharat Singh and others" on the ground of fraud, whereby coparcenary right regarding suit property, detailed in the headnote of the plaint, which had allegedly been transferred by aforesaid civil court decree by predecessor -in -interest of the plaintiffs, namely, Bharat Singh in favour of the defendants without any competency because he owned and possessed the suit land as manager of the undivided family which he inherited from his father and reasons being so, it was the ancestral property in which all plaintiffs were coparceners.
(3.) UPON notice, defendants appeared and filed joint written statement. It has been alleged that the judgment and decree challenged in this suit merely gave effect to a family settlement arrived at between the predecessor -in -interest of the plaintiffs, on one hand, and the defendants, on the other hand. It has been further alleged that no fraud was ever practiced on Bharat Singh for getting the challenged judgment passed.;