Mangi Ram And Others vs Gujja Devi And Others

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Present appeal has been preferred against judgment and decree dated 7.6.2011 passed by learned District Judge, Sirmour, District at Nahan in Civil Appeal No. 37­CA/13 of 2010, titled as Mangi Ram and others versus Smt. Gangi Devi & others, whereby judgment and decree dated 25.6.2010, passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No.2, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P. in Civil Suit No. 74­1 of 2005, titled as Smt. Gangi Devi Versus Mangi Ram and others, has been affirmed vide which suit of the plaintiff for declaration that deceased Dhanna had not executed any legal and valid Will dated 13.4.2005 in favour of appellants No. 1 to 3, in exclusion of other legal heirs including the plaintiff, and consequent permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants and in favour of the plaintiff, has been decreed.

For convenience, parties are referred here as plaintiff, defendants and proforma defendants according to their status in the Civil Suit.

Parties to the suit are natural legal heirs of deceased Dhanna, who had expired leaving behind his natural legal heirs i.e his wife Smt. Gumano (defendant No.3), two sons Mangi Ram and Rangi Ram (defendants No. 1 and 2) and four daughters Gujja Devi, Balo Devi and Satya Devi (proforma defendants No. 4 to 6) and Gangi Devi (plaintiff). Defendants No. 1 to 3 had claimed right upon the estate of deceased Dhanna on the basis of Will dated 13.4.2005 executed by Dhanna to the exclusion of all other legal heirs i.e plaintiff and proforma defendants No.4 to 6 and mutation to this effect was also attested in favour of defendants No. 1 to 3.

Plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration to the effect that Will dated 13.4.2005 was illegal, fraudulent and void and not binding upon the rights of the plaintiff and thus claiming right in the suit property as legal heirs of deceased Dhanna as well as for injunction against the defendants No.1 to 3, and proforma defendants No. 4 to 6.

In the Civil Suit proforma defendants No. 4 to 6 appeared and supported the version of defendants No. 1 to 3 by asserting that Dhanna had executed a valid Will in favour of defendants No. 1 to 3 to the exclusion of all other legal heirs i.e plaintiff and proforma defendants No. 4 to 6. However, suit was decreed allowing the prayer of plaintiff.

Being aggrieved from the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, defendants No. 1 to 3 filed Civil Appeal before the learned District Judge Sirmaur, wherein the proforma defendants No. 4 to 6 were arrayed as respondents No. 2 to 4 and they were proceeded ex­ parte.

On dismissal of the appeal by learned District Judge, defendants No. 1 to 3 alongwith proforma defendants No. 4 to 6 have filed present Regular Second Appeal jointly against the plaintiff.

During pendency of this appeal, matter has been amicably settled between the parties. An application CMP No.14589 of 2021 has also been filed for placing on record copies of compromise and affidavits of contesting parties.

On 27.12.2021, plaintiff Gangi Devi, defendants Mangi Ram and Rangi Ram appeared in person to make statements and their statements were recorded on oath.

In her statement Gangi Devi has stated that she has decided to withdraw her claim with respect to challenge laid to the Will in order to maintain peaceful, harmonious and cordial relations with her brothers by submitting that her mother and other sisters have already supported the claim of her brothers on the basis of the Will and, therefore, she has prayed that her claim challenging the Will and appeal be decided in terms of compromise by permitting her to withdraw the suit. She has categorically stated that her deposition in the Court is out of her free will, consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.

In their joint statement, Mangi Ram and Rangi Ram have endorsed the compromise by stating that parties have decided to forget the past and to start a new harmonious and loving relation with each other with undertaking to take care of their sister in case of any necessity in her life. They have further stated that defendants No. 3 to 6 have already endorsed and supported the Will executed by their father Dhanna. They have also stated that their statement in the Court is out of their free will, consent and also without any external pressure, coercion or threat of any kind.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and submissions made by contesting parties, plaintiff is permitted to withdraw Civil Suit No. 74/1 of 2005, titled as Gangi Devi versus Mangi Ram and others and consequently judgment and decree dated 25.06.2010 passed by the trial Court in the said suit and also judgment and decree dated 7.06.2011 passed by First Appellate Court in Civil Appeal No. 37­CA/13 of 2010, titled as Mangi Ram and others versus Gangi Devi & others are set­ aside and suit is dismissed as withdrawn, as prayed in terms of compromise. Accordingly, estate of Dhanna is to be inherited by his wife Smt. Gumano and sons Mangi Ram and Rangi Ram on the basis of Will dated 13.4.2005 and mutation attested on the basis of said Will in their favour shall be legal and valid for all intents and purposes.

Decree be prepared in terms of compromise in aforesaid terms. Statements of the parties and compromise shall form part of the decree.

Appeal stands disposed of accordingly, alongwith pending applications.