JUDGMENT - S.M. DAUD, J.:---This suit has its origin in a caveat lodged in response to a petition for letters of administration vis-a-vis the estate of Sardar Prehladsingh who died at Bombay on 29-1-1983.

2. Dharamsingh, a Sikh gentleman was a native of Rawalpindi now a part of Pakistan. He was married to Bhagwanti and the couple had five sons and three daughters named Tejasingh, Dhyansingh, Vasavesingh, Mehersingh, Prehladsingh, Anupkaur, Mohankaur and Iqubalkaur. Tejasingh and Iqubalkaur figure as D.Ws. 1 and 4 in this suit. Dharamsingh was a well-to-do person running a commission agency in the name of M/s. Isharsingh Dharamsingh and owning more than one house in Rawalpindi. Kuri and Sukho are villages or townships in the District of Rawalpindi. Prehladsingh was brought up by his paternal grandmother Vaziridevi as he had lost his parents while quite young. The sons separated in the early twenties of this century. From village Kuri, hailed brothers Gurmukhsingh and Kahansingh. Harkaur was a daughter of Gurmukhsingh and she was married to Premsingh, the father of Kulwantsingh (hereinafter referred to as "plaintiff"). The couple lived together for a short time and separated soon after the birth of plaintiff. Premsingh's cousin Isherkaur (P.W. 3), being the mother's sister's daughter was married to Kahansingh. The two marriages i.e. of Harkaur and Isherkaur, were, what is known as do-hati marriages in which brides and grooms are exchanged between two families. Plaintiff was brought up by Premsingh. Prehladsingh was in Rawalpindi till about 1938 to 1940 and lived together with Harkaur. The two then came over to Bombay and here Prehladsingh found his metier starting with a small restaurant 'Preetam Hindu Hotel' at Dadar, he went from strength to strength and at the time of his death was rated a very rich person. After the vivisection of the country his siblings as also Kahansingh and Premsingh etc. migrated to this country. Prehladsingh's death led Harkaur to move for letters of administration - with plaintiff filing a 'no-objection' to the solicitation though claiming the status of a son to the deceased. The dead man's sister, Iqbalkaur (defendant, has filed a caveat. Harkaur passed away on 26-5-1988 and plaintiff has been substituted as her heir to prosecute the suit.

3. Plaintiff's case is that Harkaur could not get along with Premsingh. Soon after plaintiff's birth, the couple divorced. Having regard to the youth of Harkaur, her relations decided that she could not remain single. Therefore, she was married off to Prehladsingh. Relations, the Sikh community and everyone else looked upon them as husband and wife. They resided together and were received in society as such. In 1950 or thereabouts Premsingh passed away. Prehladsingh had no issues from Harkaur. A solution was found by Prehladsingh adopting the plaintiff. Plaintiff moved over to Bombay with Prehladsingh. They lived and worked together. In fact, the thrust to Prehladsingh's rise, was the drive and innovative ideas of the plaintiff. Defendant and her relations were set up by Indra Puri the wife of D.W. 3 Atamsingh to raise a false and malicious claim to the estate of Prehladsingh. Harkaur's divorce and remarriage and the adoption of plaintiff, were all valid. In an affidavit-in-reply to a notice of motion taken out by defendant, Harkaur has averred that she obtained a decree for divorce from Premsingh in the year 1936 and that this decree was granted by the District Court of Rawalpindi. Next it was averred that as per custom, she gave plaintiff in adoption to Prehladsingh at the Golden Temple of Amritsar.

4. Defendant's case can be ascertained from D.W. 1 Tejasingh's affidavit at Ex. D-7. Dharamsingh died in 1923 and soon thereafter his sons started residing separately. The joint family business also came to an end with a partition of the assets amongst the sons of Dharamsingh. In 1935-36 Prehladsingh raised money by mortgaging his house in Rawalpindi. The said money was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document