JUDGMENT :

Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral)

By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment and decree dated 19.02.2024 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Jalandhar (hereinafter to be referred as 'First Appellate Court'), whereby the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 13.04.2018 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar (hereinafter to be referred as 'trial Court'), decreeing the suit for separate possession by metes and bounds qua 1/8th share of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 7 (filed at the instance of respondent No. 1-plaintiff / Anil Kumar), was partly allowed to the extent of grant of preliminary decree.

2. Briefly stating, respondent No. 1-plaintiff (Anil Kumar) filed a suit for possession by way of metes and bounds, claiming 1/8th share over the suit property bearing House No. ND 125, situated at Bikrampura, Jalandhar, which was owned by his mother, namely, Smt. Puran Rani wife of Sh. Vas Dev, having purchased 5% Marla of suit property through registered sale deed dated 25.07.1989 with the remaining portion of 5% Marlas been purchased in her name vide registered sale deed dated 03.01.1992, thereby making the total land measuring 11 Marlas. It was further pleaded that during her life-time, the mother, Smt. Puran Rani, sold 03 Marlas 68.5 sq. ft. in favour of Smt. Reetu wife of Sh. Anoop Kumar - appellant/defendant No. 3 vide registered sale deed dated 01.02.1999, which further came to be sold by Smt. Reetu to Smt. Kavita (respondent No. 8-defendant No. 8), who is the wife of respondent No. 1 / plaintiff-Sh. Anil Kumar vide registered sale deed dated 27.01.2011. It was then pleaded that Smt. Puran Rani died intestate on 15.06.2003 leaving behind respondent No. 1-plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1 to 7 as her legal heirs qua the remaining 8 Marlas of land and hence, the suit by respondent No.1-plaintiff, claiming 1/8th share in the property in question.

3. The aforesaid suit was contested at the hands of appellant-defendant No. 3, while claiming that the mother Smt. Puran Rani executed a registered Will dated 06.07.1999, whereby the property in question was distributed amongst the legal heirs and thus, it never remained joint after her death.

4. The trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 13.04.2018 decreed the suit, filed at the instance of respondent No. 1-plaintiff, while holding that Smt. Puran Rani died intestate, leaving behind eight legal heirs. It was held that appellant-defendant No. 3 (Anoop Kumar) failed to establish the partition of the suit property based on Will dated 06.07.1999, the same being not proved in terms of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, read with Section 68 & 69 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

5. Aggrieved thereof, appellant-defendant No. 3 filed first appeal, however, the same came to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 19.02.2024 passed by the First Appellate Court.

6. Impugning the judgments and decrees (supra) passed by the trial Court and First Appellate Court, learned counsel for appellant-defendant No.3 submits that in the wake of admission made by respondent No. 1-plaintiff while appearing as PW-2 as regards the photograph of his mother on the Will dated 06.07.1999 (Ex. DX/A), besides even admitting her signatures thereupon, no further proof of Will was required and the suit was, thus, liable to be dismissed.

7. No other argument has been raised on behalf of the appellant.

8. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and having gone through the paper-book / records, I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of appellant-defendant No.3.

9. In the present case, admittedly, the property in question was purchased by Smt. Puran Rani, who is the mother of appellant-defendant No.3 (Anoop Kumar) vide two separate registered sale deeds dated 25.07.1989 & 03.01.1992, thereby making her owner in possession of 11 Marlas of land, out of which, she sold 03 Marlas 68.5 sq. ft. in favour of