Smt. Sulochana Devi and anr. Vs. Mohan Lal and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1067286
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnMar-18-2013
AppellantSmt. Sulochana Devi and anr.
RespondentMohan Lal and ors.
Excerpt:
rs.no.5119 of 2012(o&m) #1# in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh. rs.no.5119 of 2012(o&m) date of decision:-18.03.2013 smt. sulochana devi & anr......appellants. versus mohan lal & ors......respondents. coram:- hon'ble mr.justice jaswant singh present:- mr.k.s.godara, advocate for the appellants. *** jaswant singh, j.(oral) legal heirs of deceased plaintiff sarbati devi who are her two daughters are in second appeal aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiff sarbati devi claiming the share of her deceased son subash was dismissed by the learned additional civil judge(sr.divn.).sirs.vide judgment and decree dated 15.05.2009 and the findings thereof were affirmed by the learned additional district judge, sirs.vide judgment and decree dated 20.09.2012. it transpires that defendant no.4 chottu ram had two wives namely sarbati devi and guddi. sarbati was the firs.wife and was mother of a son subash and two daughters sulochana and vinot whereas guddi devi had three sons namely mohan lal, sohan lal and balbir from the loins of chottu ram. it is further evident that father of chottu ram, namely, tansukh had by virtue of judgment and decree dated 14.06.1982 had rs.no.5119 of 2012(o&m) #2# suffered a collusive decree in favour of the aforesaid minot subash relinquishing a major share in his favour. it transpires that subsequently one of the sons mohan lal(from guddi) filed a suit, wherein the father chottu ram defendant no.4 represented the minot subash and suffered a decree dated 23.02.1984 whereby the entire property of the grandfather was given in equal shares to all the four sons. it is this collusive decree dated 23.02.1984 which is the subject matter of the challenge in the present suit. it is further not in dispute that the minot subash had died prior to the filing of the present suit by the plaintiff sarbati devi who also during the pendency of the litigation died and her two daughters namely sulochana devi were brought on record as lrs.at the time of hearing learned counsel for the lrs of the plaintiff submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and thus prays for withdrawal of the present second appeal. dismissed as withdrawn. ( jaswant singh ) judge march 18, 2013 vinay
Judgment:

Rs.No.5119 of 2012(O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Rs.No.5119 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision:-18.03.2013 Smt.

Sulochana Devi & Anr......Appellants.

Versus Mohan Lal & Ors......Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr.K.S.Godara, Advocate for the appellants.

*** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Legal heirs of deceased plaintiff Sarbati Devi who are her two daughters are in second appeal aggrieved against the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiff Sarbati Devi claiming the share of her deceased son Subash was dismissed by the learned Additional Civil Judge(Sr.Divn.).SiRs.vide judgment and decree dated 15.05.2009 and the findings thereof were affirmed by the learned Additional District Judge, SiRs.vide judgment and decree dated 20.09.2012.

It transpires that defendant no.4 Chottu Ram had two wives namely Sarbati Devi and Guddi.

Sarbati was the fiRs.wife and was mother of a son Subash and two daughters Sulochana and Vinot whereas Guddi Devi had three sons namely Mohan Lal, Sohan Lal and Balbir from the loins of Chottu Ram.

It is further evident that father of Chottu Ram, namely, Tansukh had by virtue of judgment and decree dated 14.06.1982 had Rs.No.5119 of 2012(O&M) #2# suffered a collusive decree in favour of the aforesaid minot Subash relinquishing a major share in his favour.

It transpires that subsequently one of the sons Mohan Lal(from Guddi) filed a suit, wherein the father Chottu Ram defendant no.4 represented the minot Subash and suffered a decree dated 23.02.1984 whereby the entire property of the grandfather was given in equal shares to all the four sons.

It is this collusive decree dated 23.02.1984 which is the subject matter of the challenge in the present suit.

It is further not in dispute that the minot Subash had died prior to the filing of the present suit by the plaintiff Sarbati Devi who also during the pendency of the litigation died and her two daughters namely Sulochana Devi were brought on record as LRs.At the time of hearing learned Counsel for the Lrs of the plaintiff submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and thus prays for withdrawal of the present second appeal.

Dismissed as withdrawn.

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE March 18, 2013 Vinay