JUDGMENT :

Sudip Ahluwalia, J.

1. This Appeal has been preferred against the impugned Judgment and Decree passed by the Ld. Addl. District Judge, Gurdaspur in Civil Appeal No. 183 of 2005 dated 24.9.2010, vide which the original Judgment and Decree passed by the Ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurdaspur in Civil Suit No. 294 of 2001 dated 15.6.2005 in favour of the present Appellant/Plaintiff were upheld.

2. The Appellant happens to be the widow of Piara Singh (since deceased), who was the Defendant in the original Suit for permanent injunction filed in the Court of Ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Gurdaspur by the Respondent/Plaintiff. She is one of the real sisters of deceased-Defendant Piara Singh. Both of them happened to be children of deceased Mohan Singh, who also had another son namely Gian Singh and six other daughters apart from the Plaintiff/Respondent. On 30.6.1992 the said Mohan Singh, father of the original contesting parties, executed his registered Will, which was marked Ex.P-5 by the Trial Court. In his said Will, the Testator Mohan Singh, who was owner of a two storeyed Building situated on Tibri Road, Gurdaspur, the full description of which has been given in the Plaint, had made provisions for use of the said Building including its Commercial/Shop area on the first floor for utilization of the rent and residence on the first floor in favour of his widow Bishan Kaur (since deceased) and also further provided that after the demise of said Bishan Kaur, the said Building would fall to the share of his son Piara singh (original Defendant), but that his daughters 'could otherwise' live on the first floor of the Building, without having any proprietary rights therein, nor any power to sell or transfer the said portion.

3. The Suit was thereafter filed by Respondent Surinder Kaur, whose claim was that she had lived with her deceased parents i.e. Mohan Singh and Bishan Kaur on the first floor of the said Building since childhood, that she had been married in the year 1986 even after which she used to come and reside in the Building, and about 2/3 years before the death of her father in the year 2000, she was requested by him to come and reside on the said first floor of the Building. She then shifted to the disputed portion with her family members and has been residing therein ever since. In the meantime, following the death of their parents, Defendant Piara Singh, who had become owner of the Building by virtue of his father's Will dated 30.6.1992 had threatened to demolish the same with a view to deny to the Plaintiff/Respondent her right to reside on the first floor, which right she had acquired by virtue of the provisions made in the Will of her father. She therefore, filed the Suit for permanent injunction to restrain Defendant Mohan Singh and others claiming through him from illegally and forcibly dispossessing/evicting her and her family members from the first floor of the disputed Building. The Suit was decreed in favour of the Plaintiff/ Respondent as prayed for, and the Appeal preferred against the decree was also dismissed.

4. The Appellant, who is the widow/surviving Legal Representative of deceased- Defendant Piara singh has now challenged the Judgments of both the Ld. Courts below.

5. The substance of the arguments raised on behalf of the Appellant is that both the Ld. Courts below had erred in granting a permanent injunction in favour of the Respondent/ Plaintiff under a misconception that she had acquired some kind of proprietary right in the property, which was never granted to her in the first place in the Will executed by her deceased-father. In fine, it has been asserted that in terms of the said Will dated 30.6.1992 (Ex.P-5), the ownership of the entire Building had undisputedly fallen in the share of Defendant Piara Singh. As such according to the Appellant, a mere observation in the Will to the effect that the Testator's daughters (including the Plaintiff/Respondent) 'could reside' on the disputed