Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1452 (PNJ)

Bimla Devi v. Narinder Kumar

2001-12-31

KARL REDDY

body2001
ORDER Karl Reddy, FC. - This is a petition under Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 seeking to revise the order dated 30.4.1999 of the Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur, the order dated 24.8.1998 of the District Collector, Ferozepur, and the order dated 5.3.1998 of the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Fazilka, in regard to mutation No. 686 of Village Ketehra, Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. 2. Mutation of inheritance of Raja Ram s/o Thakar Ram was entered by the patwari halqa on 20.2.1997 on the basis of a will dated 15.8.1996 registered after the death of Raja Ram on 13.2.1997. The petitioner claimed that the will is a false and fabricated document, and the mutation should be sanctioned in her favour on the basis of natural succession, her mother a brother having pre-deceased her father. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade and the Commissioner have held that the will is duly proved. The Collector decided in favour of the respondent on the ground that he is in possession, and the validity of the will would be decided by the civil suit now in progress. Hence the present petition. 3. Admittedly there was no formal adoption. The propounder the will claims that the deceased had adopted him after the death of his own son, and by various acts during his life time, including arranging his marriage, had publicly accepted him as his adopted son. The documents that have been placed on record in support of this contention include : (i) the Invitation Card issued by the family in the name of Smt. and Shri Raja Ram to dinner in connection with the birth of their grand son, Gaurav s/o Narinder Kumar (respondent); (ii) photocopy of the Savings Bank Pass Book in the name of Narinder Kumar s/o Raja Ram; (iii) credit memo and receipts of the Cooperative Credit Society issued to Narinder Kumar s/o Raja Ram; (iv) bills and other commercial documents in the name of Narinder Kumar s/o Raja Ram; (v) water supply bills in the name of Narinder Kumar s/o Raja Ram; etc. 4. Counsel for the petitioner argues that the mutation was decided in the village, and thereby the statements of the respondents witnesses were taken in evidence without affording an opportunity of cross-examination to the petitioner. 4. Counsel for the petitioner argues that the mutation was decided in the village, and thereby the statements of the respondents witnesses were taken in evidence without affording an opportunity of cross-examination to the petitioner. The documents are self-serving and on the face of it do no show that the deceased accepted the petitioner as his adopted son. Registration after the death of the testator does not carry the same weight as registration before death. The will is shrouded in suspicion. It was not scribed by a regular deed writer. It is patent that the signature of the deceased had been obtained in a blank piece of paper above which writing was inserted. The spacing and width of lines is not uniform. The date, the name of the scribe, and the word "Executant were filled in where the writing terminated so as to cover up the gap between the writing the and the signature. The signature of the testator is not in the centre, but at the right hand side. The respondent who at one stage was the General Power of Attorney of the deceased took a blank paper bearing the signature of the deceased and converted it into a will. The deceased had been admitted in Dayanand Medical College before he died on 27.9.1996. The will is dated 15.8.1996 but there is no mention about the ailment from which the deceased expected to meet his fate. 5. The statements of the sarpanch and 3 lambardars, apart from the contestants and the witnesses to the will, were recorded in the village instead of his official Headquarter, by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade. The sarpanch and 3 lambardars did not go beyond stating that they had heard of the alleged adoption. While admitting that the respondent was occupying the house of the deceased, these witnesses were not questioned whether the deceased was dependent on the respondent for his day-to-day needs, and whether at the time of his death the deceased was cultivating his land himself or thought the respondent. The voter list, the ration card, and the revenue record which would have thrown some light on these issues were not scrutinized. The claim of one Vidya Devi to be the second wife of the deceased has been discussed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, but her statement was not recorded. 6. The voter list, the ration card, and the revenue record which would have thrown some light on these issues were not scrutinized. The claim of one Vidya Devi to be the second wife of the deceased has been discussed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, but her statement was not recorded. 6. On 12.10.1992 the deceased had cancelled the registered General Power of Attorney No. 140 dated 17.9.1980 in favour of the respondent. He referred to the respondent as Narinder Kumar s/o Sheopat Rai. He alleged that the respondent had committed various irregularities whereby he was forced to cancel the General Power of Attorney. The deceased was familiar with the process and legalities of registration of documents. Had he executed a will, it is unlikely that he would not have got it registered. There are a number of doubtful circumstances regarding the spacing of lines, the placing of the signatures, etc. in the will. The marginal witnesses were not subjected to the test of cross-examination since the proceedings were conducted in the village. It was stated by the respondent before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade that the deceased had fully provided for his daughter during his lifetime and hence made no provision for her in his will. The recital in the will of the reasons for its exection in favour of the respondent who had been so recently debarred from conducting the business affairs of the deceased, and ignoring his sole surviving child i.e. his daughter would have gone a long way in establishing the authenticity of the will. There was apparently no space above the pre-recorded signature for such a recital. 7. Accordingly, the revision petition is accepted and the impugned orders are set aside. The mutation is sanctioned in favour of Bimla Devi daughter of the deceased. To be communicated. Petition accepted.