RSA No. 5111 of 2019 (O & M)

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

103

*****

RSA No. 5111 of 2019 (O & M)

Date of decision : 21.10.2022

Bhola Ram and others

……Appellants

Vs.

Mukesh Devi and others

……Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. Lalit K. Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants

---

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

, J. (Oral)

1.

This is plaintiffs’ second appeal against the concurrent findings of

both the Courts below.

2.

The facts in brief are, the appellants/plaintiffs (hereinafter referred

to as ‘the plaintiffs’) filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief

claiming themselves to be only descendants of Mool Chand, who died on

11.5.2007. He was survived by six sons, that is, the five plaintiffs and one

Ramesh Chand, who died on 2.8.2009. Mool Chand executed a valid Will

dated 27.12.2005 during his lifetime in favour of his six sons, and mutation on

that basis was also sanctioned in their name. After death of Ramesh Chand,

plaintiffs claimed that they were the only legal heirs of Ramesh Chand as he

was unmarried. Defendant no.1, Mukesh Devi, was married to one Narender

son of Sh. Ram, who died on 24.6.2004. Thereafter, Ramesh Chand (plaintiffs’

brother) started living with respondent/defendant no.1 Mukesh Devi. The two

were in live-in relationship, and were never married.

ASHWANI KUMAR

2022.10.21 16:22

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

RSA No. 5111 of 2019 (O & M)

2

3.

The respondents/defendants (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

defendants’) have pleaded that defendant no.1 performed kareva marriage with

Ramesh Chand on 6.2.2005 under the prevalent customs after the death of her

previous husband. Out of the wedlock, defendant no.2-Deepanshi was born on

8.9.2006. She also had a daughter from her previous husband Narender,

namely, Deepika alias Sonia.

4.

Both the Courts below after evaluating the evidence, have recorded

the findings that kareva marriage was solemnised between Ramesh Chand

(plaintiffs’ brother) and Mukesh Devi. Out of the wedlock, female child

defendant no.2 was born. Both were entitled to estate of the deceased Ramesh

Chand.

5.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that there is no

evidence that kareva marriage was ever solemnised between Ramesh Chand

and defendant no.1. There was no prevalent custom of such a marriage in their

caste and community. Therefore, she cannot be accepted to be legally wedded

wife of Ramesh Chand.

6.

A perusal of the judgments passed by both the Courts below

establishes that the fact of kareva marriage having been performed between

defendant no.1 and Ramesh Chand, has been duly established on record. The

findings recorded in paras no.21 and 22 of the lower Appellate Court’s

judgment to that effect read as under:

21.

……...On the other hand, respondent-defendant no.1 Mukesh

Devi to substantiate her own case while appeared as DW-1 specifically

testified through her affidavit Ex.DW1/A that she inherited 1/6th share

of her husband Ramesh Chand alongwith her daughter defendant no. 2

in his property. Her first husband Narender died on 24.6.2004. From

loins of her husband she delivered one child namely Deepika alias

Sonia. She was born on 17.4.2004. Narender died on 24.6.2004 and

ASHWANI KUMAR

2022.10.21 16:22

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

RSA No. 5111 of 2019 (O & M)

3

after that she performed Karewa marrige with Ramesh Chand on

6.2.2005 following the custom of Chadar Andazi. Her father Mahi Pal

son of Dharam Singh appeared in the witness box as DW-2 and

categorically stated that marriage of his daughter namely Mukesh Devi

was solemnised with Ramesh Chand on 6.2.2005 under the custom of

Chadar Andazi. Brother in law of Mukesh Devi namely Tarun Kumar

appeared as DW-3 and corroborated the factum of Karewa marriage of

Mukesh Devi with Ramesh Chand on 6.2.2005. DW-4 Hukam Ch