The court emphasized the need to prove the validity of a will, the importance of removing suspicious circumstances, and the application of the Limitation Act in property disputes.

S.K. Gangele, J.;-

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree dt. 18.5.2012 passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 25A/2011. Bhagwati Devi had two children; one son Prakash Narayan Dubey and a daughter Ram Kishori Devi. Her husband Mijaji Lal Dubey died during her lifetime. Bhagwati Devi purchased a house No. 50/779 at Ganesh Bazar (Chavdi Bazar), Lashkar, Gwalior (hereinafter called 'suit property').

2. The plaintiffs, who are the sons of Ram Kishori Devi, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. They pleaded that the suit house was purchased by Bhagwati Devi from her self earned property. After her death, Prakash Narayan Dubey and Ram Kishori Devi, who were the children of Bhagwati Devi became owner of the suit property in equal proportion. Plaintiffs are the sons of Ram Kishori Devi. Their father constructed a hotel over some portion of the house named as 'Basera Hotel'. He had been residing in the house. Mother of the plaintiffs executed a 'Will' and bequeathed the property in favour of the plaintiffs. Hence, the plaintiffs are the owner of the suit house, however, the defendant was trying to sale the property. Hence, the suit for declaration and permanent injunction was filed.

3. The defendant, who is the wife of Prakash Narayan Dubey son of Bhagwati Devi, in her written statement pleaded that Bhagwati Devi died on 29.12.1972. After her death, the suit house was recorded in the name of her husband Prakash Narayan Dubey in the records of Municipal Corporation Gwalior. He had been using the property and after death of Prakash Narayan Dubey, defendant has been using the property and is in possession of the property as owner. She further pleaded that Ram Kishori Devi had no right to execute the 'Will' in regard to suit property. Defendant also raised an objection in regard to valuation of the suit. She pleaded that the valuation of the suit property is 45 lac and ad valorem court fees is required to be paid on the suit property. She also pleaded that after death of her husband, her name was recorded as owner of the suit property. The defendant also raised an objection in regard to limitation and pleaded that the suit is beyond limitation.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, trial court framed seven issues to the effect that whether Ram Kishori Devi had executed a 'Will' in favour of the plaintiffs and whether there was oral partition of the suit property between the mother of the plaintiffs and the husband of the defendant. Issue No. 3 is that whether defendant and plaintiffs have equal share in the suit property and whether the defendant has been trying to sale the property or whether she has been residing in the suit house. Issue No. 6 is in regard to valuation of the property and issue No. 7 is in regard to limitation.

5. Trial court after trial has held that the 'Will' was executed by Ram Kishori Devi in favour of the plaintiffs and there was an oral partition between the mother of the plaintiffs and husband of the defendant and the plaintiffs and defendant have equal share in the suit property. The suit is within limitation and proper valuation of the suit has been made by the plaintiffs and the court fees has also been paid properly. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, trial court decreed the suit.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the suit filed by the plaintiffs was beyond limitation. The execution of 'Will' was not proved by the plaintiffs and there was no oral partition between the family members. The trial court has committed an error of law in decreeing the suit.

7. Contrary to this, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has contended that the findings recorded by the Trial court are in accordance with law. There was recurring cause of action and the trial court has rightly held that the suit was within limitation. It is further submitted by the learned senior counsel that after death of Bhagwati