Back
2018 Supreme(P&H) 3585
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rekha Mittal, J.
Savitri Devi And Others - Appellant
Versus
Satish Kumar And Others - Respondent
Regular Second Appeal No. 2243 of 2013
Decided On : 01-10-2018
Rajesh Sethi, Adv., Pridhi Jaswinder Sandhu, Adv., Sunil Chadha, Adv., Chetan Bansal, Adv.
Headnote:
LRs - Inheritance - - [Succession Act, 1925, Hindu Succession Act, 1956] - The court discussed the validity of a Will dated 01.07.1994 and its effect on the inheritance of land. The key legal provisions discussed were related to testamentary succession, joint Hindu family property, and the mental capacity of the testator. The court's decision was influenced by the evidence of the testator's mental capacity, the nature of the property, and the validity of the Will.
Fact of the Case:
The case pertains to a dispute over inheritance of land left by Sh. Chattar Singh, involving the validity of a Will dated 01.07.1994 in favor of Satish, the minor son of Chand Ram. The appellants challenged the Will on various grounds, including the nature of the property, the mental capacity of Chattar Singh, and the genuineness of the Will.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence to substantiate the claim that the land was Joint Hindu Family Coparcenary Property. It also found no evidence of Chattar Singh's physical or mental disability to understand the Will, and no challenge to the fact that Chattar Singh had already distributed land to his other sons. The court also rejected the appellants' claim of strained relations between Chattar Singh and Chand Ram, and the argument that Satish, being a minor, could not have rendered services to Chattar Singh.
Issues: The issues included the ownership of the suit property, the validity of the Will, the applicability of agricultural custom in inheritance, the nature of the property as ancestral joint Hindu family property, and the maintainability of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence to support the appellants' claims regarding the nature of the property, Chattar Singh's mental capacity, and the strained relations between Chattar Singh and Chand Ram. The court also considered the evidence of the testator's mental capacity, the nature of the property, and the validity of the Will.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeal in terms of the compromise dated 13.09.2004, modifying the judgment and decree passed by the Court in appeal in light of the compromise. The terms and conditions of the compromise were made part of the decree.
JUDGMENT
Rekha Mittal, J. - Cm No.6121-C of 2013
Prayer in this application is for bringing on record legal representatives (in short 'LRs') of Lakhmi Chand (since deceased) and Tej Ram (since deceased).
2. Heard.
3. In view of averments made in the application supported by an affidavit of Sukh Ram, one of the alleged LRs of Lakhmi Chand, the application is allowed and persons mentioned in para 4 of the application are allowed to be brought on record as LRs of deceased Lakhmi Chand and Tej Ram subject to just exceptions and for the purpose of present lis.
4. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.
5. Disposed of accordingly.
RSA No.2243 of 2013
6. The present lis pertains to inheritance qua land measuring 17 kanal 6 marlas comprising khasra numbers, detailed in para 2 of judgment of the trial Court, previously owned by Sh. Chattar Singh who passed away on 31.07.1994. Sh. Chattar Singh had two wives namely Smt. Sarupi (since deceased) and Suraj Kaur, four sons namely Chand Ram, born out of his wedlock with Suraj Kaur, Nand Lal, Lakhmi Chand and Lal Chand sons of Sarupi.
7. The appellants/plaintiffs namely Nand Lal (since deceased) represented by his LRs, Lakhmi Chand, Smt. Sarupi (since deceased) represented by her LRs, Smt. Shanti daughter of Sh. Chattar Singh, Kamal Singh and Others, successors in interest of Sh. Lal Chand son of Sh. Chattar Singh challenged Will dated 01.07.1994 allegedly executed by deceased Sh. Chattar Singh in favour of Satish, minor son of Chand Ram being illegal, null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs, thereby claiming 1/7th share each for all the class I heirs or their successors in interest including Chand Ram left behind by Sh. Chattar Singh. The appellants challenged the Will inter alia on the following grounds, detailed in sub paras (a) to (e) of para 5 of the plaint:-
(a) The land in dispute is ancestral property which cannot be alienated or transferred by way of Will.
(b) Sh. Chattar Singh could not execute the Will in respect of Rect No.61 where houses of plaintiffs had been constructed during his lifetime and the house owners have become owners of their respective area.
(c) Sh. Chattar Singh was not having sound mind and physique and was hard of hearing.
(d) The Will was not an act of free will and intention of deceased Chattar Singh.
(e) Smt. Suraj Kaur and Chand Ram had strangulated (sic) relation with deceased Chattar Singh and Will in favour of Satish son of Chand Ram is not genuine.
8. Initially, there were three defendants in the suit namely Satish, minor son of Chand Ram, Chand Ram son of Chattar Singh and Suraj Kaur widow of Chattar Singh. Later, claim against Smt. Suraj Kaur was withdrawn. Suit of the plaintiffs/appellants was contested by defendant No.1 through his guardian Chand Ram, his father.
9. Defendant No.1 filed the written statement and raised preliminary objections that the appellants have concealed material facts and made incorrect statements in the plaint. Sh. Chattar Singh belonged to Jat community, one of the major agricultural tribes of Punjab territory including Gurgaon district. The institution of Joint Hindu Family and Coparcenary Property did not exist in the said tribe. The suit land was not ancestral property in the hands of Sh. Chattar Singh. Chattar Singh had four sons namely Nand Lal, Lakhmi Chand, Chand Ram and Lal Chand. In the year 1970, Sh. Chattar Singh made gift of two acres of his land to Nand Lal plaintiff. Defendant No.1 had rendered services to Chattar Singh and Chattar Singh being pleased with him and out of love and affection executed registered Will on 01.07.1994 and bequeathed the suit land to the answering defendant. On death of Chattar Singh, mutation in respect of suit land was sanctioned in favour of answering defendant who is owner in possession of land in dispute together with house existing in land. The plaintiffs being not in possession of the suit property, suit for declaration simplicitor is not maintainable. The suit is fals
