JUDGMENT :- This Second Appeal arises from the decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division at Barshi in Regular Civil Suit No.365 of 1981 for partition and perpetual injunction and duly confirmed in Regular Civil Appeal No.625 of 1987 by the learned 3rd Addl. District Judge at Solapur. Though while admitting the appeal no substantial questions of law were framed, subsequently by written submissions placed on record sometimes in June, 2000 the following substantial questions of law have been framed by the appellant original defendant:

(a) Whether unless a Certificate under Section 32-M of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act is issued, the title does not vest in the tenant purchaser, as held by the courts below?

(b) Whether Sopan could have executed a will before obtaining the 32-M certificate in respect of the entire tenanted property?

(c) Whether the suit property obtained by the deceased Sopan in 1950 or thereabout as a tenant, of which he later on became a statutory purchaser by virtue of provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, is a self-acquired property of the deceased Sopan or a joint family property?

(d) Whether by way of a registered will dated 11th February, 1980, which is held as proved by the Courts below, the defendant has acquired ownership of the entire suit land to the exclusion of the plaintiffs?

2. Rajaram Zol, a resident of Pangari had three sons viz. Ambadas, Shankar and Sopan. Sopan Zol was cultivating the suit agricultural land owned by Shri. Ramchandra Kale and the said land admeasured 8 H. 35 Rs. and located in Gat No.357. He came in possession of the said land as a tenant sometimes in the year 1951-52 and was in cultivation as on 1/4/1957. Sopan, therefore, became a protected tenant and consequently a statutory purchaser of the said land under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. He did not remit the purchase price and, therefore, ownership certificate under Section 32-M of the said Act was not issued in his favour. Sopan's wife and four sons filed Regular Civil Suit No.365 of 1981 against Sopan's only daughter for perpetual injunction and for partition of the suit property. The plaintiffs claimed that they were entitled for 35/36th share in the suit land. The defendant filed her Written statement at Exhibit 79 and stated that her father Sopan had executed a Will on 11/2/1980 and the same was registered at Exh. 223. As per the said Will Sopan had bequeathed the entire suit property to the defendant as she had looked after him, paid for his medical treatment, acted as his power of attorney to fight the Court cases to restore possession of the suit land in favour of Sopan and lastly on account of love and affection. She further claimed that the suit land was self acquired property of Sopan and, therefore, he had the legal right to bequeath it in its entirety as per his choice. She further claimed that the plaintiffs being the wife and sons of Sopan had no right to ask for any share in the self acquired suit property. The plaintiffs amended the plaint and challenged the legality and validity of the Will of Sopan on various grounds. On behalf of the plaintiffs, plaintiff no.1 Yamuna (PW 1), plaintiffno.3 Shivaji (PW 2), Arjun Godse (PW 3), Ramchandra Kadam (PW 4) and Vitthal Mase (PW 5) were examined. The defendant examined herself.

3. Admittedly Sopan Zol died on 29/ 5/1982 and the defendant was born on 1/6/1949 and was married in the year 1969 to Chandrakant Tirhekar, a resident of Barshi. She had completed her Diploma in Education. She is the third child amongst the five children born to plaintiff no. 1 and Sopan. Plaintiff no.2 Ganpat and plaintiff no.3 Shivaji are the elder brothers of defendant whereas plaintiff no.4 Arvind and plaintiff no.5 Shankar are her younger brothers. She was residing with her husband upto 1972 and begot two children. It appears that her husband contracted second marriage and, therefore, she instituted pro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document