SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(MP) 89

ROHIT ARYA
Shivkumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sukhdev Lal – Respondent


Advocates:
Sanjay Sharma for petitioners; Prashant Sharma for respondents No.1 to 3; R.K. Soni for respondents No.4 to 6

ORDER

1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by defendants is directed against the order dated 20.11.2013 by which plaintiffs application under section 45 of the Evidence Act has been allowed.

2. A suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been filed to the effect that the suit land is of the co-ownership and plaintiffs has half share in it with further declaration that Will dated 12.2.1991 is forged and fabricated. At the stage when the parties are yet to lead evidence, plaintiffs filed an application under section 45 of the Evidence Act inter alia contending that the suit land falling in survey Nos.519, 529 and 532 was of the joint ownership and possession of their mother-Raksha Devi and husband of defendant No.1 and father of defendants No.2 to 4, namely, Somnath alias Somi Sharma. Defendants taking advantage of the absence of plaintiffs, who stayed in Punjab, got a forged and fabricated Will dated 12.2.1991 in the name of plaintiffs’ mother executed in favour of defendants No.1 to 4 bequeathing her share in the property to defendants No.1 to 4. The thumb impression over the Will is forged. Raksha Devi never bequeathed half of her share in th











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top