VINEY MITTAL, J. - (1.) The plaintiff is the appellant before this Court. He has lost before the learned first appellate Court. He filed a suit for possession on December 22,1999 claiming that Sajjan Singh was the original owner of the suit land and after his death the land in question devolved upon Kesar Kaur. The plaintiff claimed that he had rendered services to Kesar Kaur and in lieu thereto Kesar Kaur was executed a registered will dated December 19,1984 in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed exclusive ownership and possession over the suit property on the basis of the said will.
(2.) It was further pleaded by the plaintiff that Jangir Kaur,defendant ( since dead) was claiming the suit property and a mutation had been sanctioned on November 17,1995 in her favour and on the basis of the aforesaid mutation she had taken the forcible possession of the suit land. Consequently, the suit in question was filed. The defendant Jangir Kaur, contested the suit. She claimed that she is real sister of Sajjan Singh. She further stated that plaintiff was not, in any manner, connected with the family of Sajjan Singh. She also denied that any will had been executed by Kesar Kaur in favour of the plaintiff.
(3.) The said will was claimed to be forged and fictitious. During the course of the suit one Buta Singh moved an R.S.A. No.2779 of 2004 2 application claiming that he had purchased the suit property from Jangir Kaur on November 24,1995 and was in actual possession of the suit property. He claimed that he had stepped into the shoes of Jangir Kaur. He was allowed to be impleaded as party-defendant.;