VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. This Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the two defendants in the suit, impugning the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the Trial Court dated 6.4.2009 and the First Appellate Court dated 7.6.2014; by which the courts below have decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for declaration that the Family Settlement Deed dated 18.12.2000 (Ex.DW1/1) and the Relinquishment Deed dated 3.2.1998 (Ex.DW3/1) are declared null and void. Respondent/plaintiff has also been held entitled to possession of the first floor and second floor of the suit property bearing H.No. 408, Gagan Vihar, Delhi-110051 on a plot of land admeasuring 272 sq. yds. By the relinquishment deed the respondent/plaintiff had declared that the suit property belonged to his mother, and which deed was prayed to be cancelled on the ground that when this relinquishment deed was executed, he was not aware of the Will dated 28.4.1995, Ex.PW1/1, executed by the owner/father bequeathing the suit property in the respondents/plaintiffs favour. By the Family Settlement Deed dated 18.12.2000 (Ex.DW1/1) entered into between the respondent/plaintiff/brother and the appellant no.1/sister/defendant no.1 it was agreed that the ground floor of the suit property will be exclusively owned by the respondent/plaintiff and the first floor and above portions by the appellant no.1/defendant no.1, and which deed was also prayed to be declared as void on the same ground that this document was executed in ignorance of existence of the Will of the father dated 28.4.1995, Ex.PW1/1.

2. The facts of the case are that the father of the appellant no.1/defendant no.1/sister and the respondent/plaintiff/brother Sh. Jagdish Prasad Saxena was the owner of the suit property stated above. As per the case of the respondent/plaintiff, the father died on 22.3.1996 leaving behind a Will dated 28.4.1995 bequeathing the suit property in favour of the mother Smt. Urmila Saxena as life estate and after mother’s death to the respondent/plaintiff, however, this Will of the father dated 28.4.1995 was not to the knowledge of the respondent/plaintiff till May, 2002, when the wife of the respondent/plaintiff was setting right the household articles she found this Will wrapped inside a cloth. In the replication to the written statement of the appellants/defendants the respondent/plaintiff firstly denied that he had ever executed the Family Settlement Deed dated 18.12.2000, and that in any case this family settlement did not give any rights to the appellant no.1/defendant no.1/sister in the suit property because the same was executed in ignorance of the existence of the Will of the father dated 28.4.1995. The plaintiff/respondent has further pleaded that on account of appellant no.1/defendant no.1/sister stating that she had a Will in her favour from the father of the suit property, but which was not shown to the respondent/plaintiff, appellant no.1 constructed the first floor and second floor on the suit property in spite of protestations of the respondent/plaintiff. The subject suit was hence filed for declaring as null and void the Relinquishment Deed dated 3.2.1998 executed by the respondent/plaintiff and appellant no.1/defendant no.1 in favour of the mother Smt. Urmila Saxena and also for cancellation of the Family Settlement Deed dated 18.12.2000, copy of which was said to be given to the respondent/plaintiff by the appellant no.1 only on 16.8.2002. Possession was also prayed of the first floor and second floor of the suit property which was constructed by and in possession of the appellant no.1/defendant no.1.

3. Appellants/defendants contested the suit. Appellant no.1 is the wife of appellant no.2/defendant no.2. The appellants/defendants disputed the existence of the Will dated 28.4.1995 executed by father whereby life estate was given in favour of his widow Smt. Urmila Saxena, mother of the respondent/plai