M.S. Liberhan, J. - (1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree in a suit by the plaintiff-respondents for declaration, joint possession, partition and rendition of accounts decreed by the lower appellate Court.
(2.) The plaintiffs claimed Sahib Singh Mann to be the last male holder of the properties in dispute. The plaintiffs Kulwant Kaur, Jaswant Kaur, Rajwant Kaur and Basant Kaur are the daughters of Sahib Singh Mann. Gurdial Singh Mann, Major Dharampal Singh Mann and Major Ram Pal Singh Mann are the sons of Sahib Singh Mann. Amarjit Kaur, Madanjit Kaur and Sukhpal Kaur are daughters-in-law of Sahib Singh Mann and wives of Gurdial Singh Mann, Major Dharampal Singh Mann and Major Ram Pal Singh Mann, respectively. Defendants No. 7 to 9 were the tenants on the land in dispute. Defendant No. 10 is the Improvement Trust who has acquired a part of the property. Sahib Singh Mann was the absolute owner and in possession of the properties in dispute. He was also owner of shares worth Rs. 50,000.00 in Jagatjit Cotton Textile Mills, Phagwara. The plaintiffs claimed the land in dispute to the extent of 1/7th share each on the basis of his duly executed last will dated Feb. 2, 1972 in favour of the plaintiffs and defendants No. 1 to 3 i.e. his sons. The Will was stated to be in possession of Lt. Col. Gurdev Singh, one of the attesting witnesses of the Will. It was averred that defendants Nos. 1 to 3 exercised influence on the plaintiffs for not reporting the will to the revenue authorities during the life time of their mother Smt. Lachhman Kaur in order to respect her sentiments, as no part of the estate was willed in her favour. It was only after her death on June 3, 1976 that the Will was put forth to stake their claim to the estate of the deceased Sahib Singh Mann, who died on Nov. 22, 1974. The decree dated Feb. 10, 1971 passed in favour of the defendants No. 4 to 6, the daughters-in-law, in a suit against Sahib Singh Mann, was challenged being collusive decree and being contrary to the version set up in the said suit with respect to the family settlement. It was averred that since there was no such family settlement, hence the decree was null and void. It was averred that defendants No. 4 to 6 were judicially separated from their husbands, defendants No. 1 to 3 respectively. The plaintiffs claimed to have acquired the knowledge with respect to the sanctioning of the mutation on April 28, 1975 in favour of defendants only after the death of their mother. In the alternative, the plaintiffs claimed 1/7th shares as the best legal heirs of deceased Sahib Singh Mann under Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The plaintiffs further claimed compensation money according to their share due from the Improvement Trust. It was averred that since the defendants had been dealing with the estate of the deceased and no accounts have been rendered, hence the rendition of accounts was sought.
(3.) Defendant No. 1 to 6 admitted the relationship of the deceased with the plaintiffs, the absolute ownership and possession of the property of the deceased. It was averred that since the property described in head note 'A' sub-head 2 of the plaint (sic) same was confirmed by the decree of Sub Judge Ist Class, Bassi Pathana dated Feb. 16, 1971 and mutation was sanctioned in terms of the decree on April 29, 1971, the properties did not belong to the deceased at the time of his death. The defendants further claimed the exclusion of the plaintiffs and Smt. Lachhman Kaur, their mother, in view of the Will duly executed in their favour on March 30, 1968. It was claimed that defendants rendered service to the deceased. The plaintiffs were married in affluent families owning huge properties. The genuineness, validity and execution of the Will dated Feb. 2, 1972 was challenged. It was averred that since the deceased was a Sarpanch of village Khan Pur from 1960 till 1972 and during that period he affixed his seal and signatures on many written and blank papers as Sarpanch, the plaintiffs might have utilised one of such papers for forging the Will. It was averred that the Will dated March 30, 1968 was impliedly accepted by the plaintiffs. It was averred that the deceased as well as Smt. Lachhman Kaur always wanted and intended to transfer the property to the defendants and acting with the said intention had even transferred the property during their life time through a decree in favour of defendants No. 4 to 6. Various other pleas were also raised.;