The court upheld res judicata in affirming the validity of a will and associated property transfer, dismissing claims of ownership by appellants.

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

CM-11596-C-2019 Prayer in this application filed under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 CPC is for permitting the applicant/respondents to lead additional evidence in the shape of (i) judgment and decree dated 27.01.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhiwani; (ii) judgment and decree dated 01.05.1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhiwani; and (iii) order dated 21.09.1999 passed by this Court in RSA-2195 of 1999, as Annexures R-1, R-2 and R-3, respectively.

Heard.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and copies of (i) judgment and decree dated 27.01.1998; (ii) judgment and decree dated 01.05.1999; and (iii) order dated 21.09.1999 passed by this Court, are taken on record as Annexures R-1, R-2 and R-3, respectively, subject to all just exceptions.

CM-4669-C-2022 Prayer in this application filed by the defendant/respondent is for listing the main appeal for final hearing in terms of order dated

19.09.2018 passed by the Predecessor Bench of this Court.

Ld. Counsel for the applicant-respondent submits that notice in the present application was issued by Predecessor Bench vide order dated 5.8.2022; whereafter the matter has been adjourned repeatedly at request of learned counsel for the non-applicant/appellant. It is submitted that the rights of the parties qua the present suit land/estate of Har Chand already stand decided in a previous proceeding. This fact was brought to the notice of the Predecessor Bench as recorded in order dated 7.8.2024; on which date matter was adjourned at request of learned counsel for the appellant who had sought time to seek instructions in this regard. However, even on last date of hearing on 6.2.2025, matter was adjourned at request of learned counsel for the non-applicant/appellant. It is accordingly prayed that the matter be taken up for hearing.

Heard.

Today, none has put in appearance on behalf of the appellants, despite the case having been called twice.

For the reasons mentioned in the application which is supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed and the main second appeal is ordered to be listed for final hearing today itself.

RSA-749-1999 (O&M)

1. The appellant-plaintiffs are in second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29.09.1998, passed by the learned Additional District Judge-II, Bhiwani, vide which the suit filed by the plaintiffs/appellants seeking declaration that the judgment and decree dated 23.11.1992, passed in Civil Suit No. 679 of 1992 titled as ‘ Mange Ram vs. Har Chand ’; and mutation sanctioned thereupon, in favour of defendant/respondent qua the suit land; and a declaration that the plaintiffs are owners in possession of the suit land, has been dismissed; on the ground that “the plaintiffs have no locus standi to challenge the judgment and decree dated 23.11.1992”.

2. Brief facts of the case as evident from the file, are that plaintiffs are the daughters of Akhe Ram, who is the brother of Har Chand. Har Chand was unmarried and had died issueless. Vide Registered Will dated 23.03.1992 Har Chand had transferred the present suit land in the name of the present defendant Mange Ram. The validity of the said Will was challenged by the present plaintiffs by way of Civil Suit No. 583 dated 11.08.1993 , titled as ‘ Smt. Amarpati and others vs. Mange Ram ’, thereby also seeking declaration that the plaintiffs be declared owners in possession of the suit land. The said Civil Suit No. 583 dated 11.08.1993 filed by the appellant-plaintiffs in respect of suit land was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 27.01.1998 (Annexure R-1). Against the said judgm