Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 180 (CHH)

Thakuri v. Sukhmenbai

2004-09-29

NARAYAN SINGH

body2004
vkns’k 1- vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh] lwjtiqj ftyk ljxqtk ds jktLo izdj.k Ø- 26@v&6@1998&99 esa ikfjr vkns’k fnukad 3-11-99 ls ifjosfnr gksdj ;g vihy NÙkhlx<+ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 dh /kkjk 44¼2½ ds varxZr izLrqr dh xbZ gSA NÙkhlx<+ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk 1959 dks vkxs dsoy lafgrk dgk tk,xkA 2- vihy vkosnu i= esa vihy ds dqy 9 vk/kkj mYys[k fd;s x;s gSaA eq[; vk/kkj bl izdkj gSa & iz’uk/khu izdj.k esa vihykFkhZx.k dk olh;rukek fnukad 17-2-95 dk gS] tcfd mÙkjoknh dk olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dk gSA bl izdkj ds olh;rukek ds vk/kkj ij mÙkjoknh dk iwoZ dk olh;rukek Lo;eso fujLr gks x;kA olh;rukek fnukad 17-2-95 ds vk/kkj ij okn Hkwfe ifjf’k”V ^v^ ds 1@2 fgLls dk Lokeh vihykFkhZ Ø- 2 jkelk; gqvk Fkk 1@2 fgLls dk Lokeh Bdqjh Lo;a gS] blfy;s olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 fujLr fd;s tks ;ksX; gS] ,slk u ekudj olh;rukek fnukad 14-12-98 dks O;ogkj U;k;ky; esa O;ogkjokn izLrqr dj fn;k FkkA jftlVMZ olh;rukek gksrs gq, Hkh ;fn ckn esa lknk olh;rukek fu”ikfnr fd;k x;k gS rks jftLVMZ olh;rukek fo’oluh; ugha jg tkrk gS] bl fcanq ij Hkh U;kf;d n`”Vkar ds vk/kkj ij vkyksP; vkns’k bl vk/kkj ij ikfjr fd;k x;k gS fd lkns olh;rukek dh vis{kk jftLVMZ olh;rukek T;knk fo’oluh; ugha gS] tks U;k;ksfpr ugha gSA vihykFkhZ }kjk izLrqr lkf{k;ksa ds dFku ij Hkh v/khuLFk U;k;ky; us fo’okl ugha dj Hkwy dh gSA vihy vkosnu i= esa vihykFkhZ dh vksj ls ;g fuosnu fd;k x;k fd v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkns’k fnukad 3-11-99 dks fujLr dj vihykFkhZx.k }kjk izLrqr olh;rukek fnukad 17-2-95 dks oS/k ekurs gq, mÙkjoknh }kjk izLrqr olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dks fujLr djus dk vkns’k iznku fd;k tk;sA 3¼1½- vihykFkhZ dh vksj ls fo}ku vf/koDrk Jh ,e-lh- xqIrk us rdZ izLrqr fd;sA mÙkjoknh ,oa mÙkjoknh ds vf/koDrk ds vuqifLFkr jgus ds dkj.k ,d i{kh; dk;Zokgh dh xbZ rFkk izdj.k esa xq.knks”k ds vk/kkj ij vkns’k ikfjr djus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;kA 3¼2½- vihykFkhZx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us vius rdZ esa ;g cryk;s fd okn laifÙk la;qDr laifÙk FkhA bl laifÙk ds ckjs esa nks olh;rukek fd;s x;s gSaA ,d olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dk gS tks iathd`r gS rFkk nwljk olh;rukek fnukad 17-2-95 dks fd;k x;k tks viathd`r gSA olh;rukek esa ;g ns[kuk pkfg, fd olh;drkZ dh vafre bPNk D;k gS ,oa fdlds i{k esa gSA lansg dk fu”d”kZ rF;ksa ij vk/kkfjr gksuk pkfg, u fd dYiuk ijA iathd`r olh;rukek ds 2 xokg cStukFk ,oa jkek/khu mudk lk{; ugha fy;k x;kA muds fj’rsnkj ,oa nLrkost ys[kd ds lk{; fy;s x;s blfy;s lk{; lansg ls ijs ugha gSA muds }kjk jkek ds lk{; ds izfrijh{k.k dh vksj Hkh /;ku vkdf”kZr fd;k x;kA iathd`r olh;rukek lansg ds ijs izekf.kr ugha gSA muds }kjk fganw ykWdh /kkjk 8 dh vksj Hkh /;ku vkdf”kZr djrs gq, ;g cryk;k x;k fd Bdqjh dks LoRo mÙkjkf/kdkj ds vk/kkj ij igys izkIr gksrk gSA bl laca/k esa 1990 ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1742 dk U;kf;d n`”Vkar izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA muds }kjk lq[kesu ds lk{; ds ckjs esa mYys[k fd;k x;k gSA muds }kjk ;g Hkh cryk;k x;k fd cStukFk nwljs xzke dk fuoklh gS] lq[kesuckbZ }kjk mudks iz;ksftr fd;k x;k FkkA iz’uk/khu izdj.k esa LokHkkfod yxko fdlds i{k esa ;g ns[kuk vko’;d gSA muds }kjk vihy Lohdkj djus ds fy;s fuosnu fd;k x;kA fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk izLrqr U;kf;d n`”Vkar bl izdkj gSa& AIR 1990 Supreme Court 1742 (A) Succession Act (1925), S. 61 – Will – Proof – Testator, father disinherited one daughter – Her happy marriage or financially well settled could not add to genuineness of Will, especially when no finding of dire circumstances of other daughter was recorded by any Courts. (Para 23) (B) Constitution of India, Art. 136 – Will – Proof – Finding of fact Intereference – disintheritance amongst heirs of equal degree – No reason for exclusion of daughter disclosed by testator, a father – finding of fact as to genuineness of Will by courts can be interefered with under Art. 136. (2) ......Prudence, however, requires reason for denying benefit to those who too were entitled to bounty of testator as they had similar claims on him. Absence of it may not invalidate a Will but it shrouds the disposition with suspicion as it does not given any inkling to the mind of testatory to enable the Court to judge if the disposition was voluntary act. Taking active interest by propounder in execution of Will arises another strong suspicion. In H. Venkatachatla Vs. B.N. Thimmajamma, AIR SC 443, it was held to render the Will infirm unless the propounder cleared the suspicion with clear and satisfactory evidence. Mere execution of Will, thus, by producing scribe or attesting witness or proving genuineness of testators thumb impressions by themselves was not sufficient to establish validity of Will unless suspicious circumstances, usual or special, or ruled out and the courts conscience is statisfied not only on execution but about its authenticity. Mere execution of Will, thus, by producing scribe or attesting witness or proving genuineness of testators thumb impressions by themselves was not sufficient to establish validity of Will unless suspicious circumstances, usual or special, or ruled out and the courts conscience is statisfied not only on execution but about its authenticity. 4- uk;c rglhynkj HkVxk¡o ds izdj.k Ø- 8@v&6@96&96 ,oa vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh] lwjtiqj ds izdj.k Ø- 26@v&6@98&99 ds ewy fjdkMksZa dks xaHkhjrk ls v/;;u fd;k x;kA izdj.k lexz :i ls lw{e foospu djus ds i’pkr~ bl izdkj ik;k tkrk gS& 4¼1½- uk;c rglhynkj] HkVxk¡o ds izdj.k Ø- 8@v&6@95&96 esa ikfjr vkns’k fnuakd 16-12-96 dk lw{e foospu fd;k x;kA uk;c rglhynkj us lHkh igyqvksa dk foLr`r :i ls ijh{k.k djus ds i’pkr~ ;g ik;k fd fnukad 17-2-95 dks fu”ikfnr olh;rukek dh vis{kk fnukad 24-1-95 dks fu”ikfnr olh;rukek T;knk fo’oluh; ,oa oS/k izrhr gksrk gSA fnukad 17-2-95 dks fu”ikfnr olh;rukek dh fo’oluh;rk ij lansg mRiUu gkskr gSA lk{; vf/kfu;e 1872 dh /kkjk 68 ds vuqlkj de ls de ,d lk{kh dk ijh{k.k djkuk vfuok;Z gSA uk;c rglhynkj us lw{e foospuk djus ds i’pkr~ iathd`r olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dks Lohdkj dj vkns’k ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA 4¼2½- uk;c rglhynkj ds mDr vkns’k ds fo:) vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh] lwjtiqj ds le{k vihy izLrqr dh xbZ tks izdj.k Ø- 26@v&6@98&99 ntZ gksdj fnukad 3-11-99 dks vkns’k ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh us izdj.k dk lw{e :i ls foospuk djus ds i’pkr~ ;g ik;k fd & ^^eSaus fuEu U;k;ky; ds izdj.k ,oa mHk; i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkvksa }kjk izLrqr fyf[kr rdZ dk v/;;u fd;kA izdj.k esa nks olh;rukek Øe’k% fnukad 24-1-95 ,oa 17-2-95 izLrqr gSa ,oa izdj.k esa eq[; :i ls izLrqr nksuksa olh;r esa dkSu lk olh;rukek lgh gS blh fcanq ij U;k;ky; dks tk¡p fd;k tkuk gSA olh;rukek ls laca/k esa ;g /kkj.kk dh tkrh gS fd ckn ds fnukad esa tks olh;rukek fy[kk tkrk gS og lgh ekuk tkrk gSA ijarq e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 dh /kkjk 109 fVIi.kh 7 olh;r ^^;|fi jftLVªh t:jh ugha gS fQj Hkh vujftLVMZ ls jftLVMZ ij vf/kd Hkjkslk fd;k tk ldrk gSA cStukFk fo- y{ehckbZ ¼1980¼2½ e-iz-oh-uks- 268½] yhyk fo- jkuh iqjkoyh ¼1965 jk-fu- 184½ esa vujftLVMZ ls jftLVMZ dks vf/kd mfpr ekuk x;k gSA izdj.k ds voyksdu ls Li”V gS fd izdj.k esa layXu nks olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 jftLVMZ gS ,oa olh;rukek fnukad 17-2-95 vujftLVMZ gSA jftLVMZ olh;rukek ds xokg Ø- 1 jkekjke vk- yks/kw lkfdu rsyxoka us vius c;ku esa Hkh olh;rukek dks vius le{k t;dj.k }kjk fy[kok;k tkuk rFkk gLrk{kj vaxwBk fu’kku yxkuk izekf.kr fd;k gS ftlls eSa olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 ¼jftLVMZ½ dks lk{kh }kjk izekf.kr gksus rFkk jftLVMZ gksus ls lansg ls ijs izekf.kr ikrk gw¡A vuqfoHkkxh; vf/kdkjh us Hkh olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dks lansg ls ijs ikdj Lohdkj fd;k gS vFkkZr~ nksuksa v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa ds fu”d”kZ leorhZ gSa ,oa olh;rukek fnukad 24-1-95 dks nksuksa v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa esa lansg ls ijs ik;k gSA leorhZ fu”d”kZ okys izdj.k esa tc rd dksbZ xaHkhj dkuwuh ;k rF;kRed =qfV u gks rc rd gLr{ksi ugha fd;k tk ldrkA vihykFkhZx.k dh vksj ls fo}ku vf/koDrk us bl laca/k esa dksbZ rdZ ;k oS/kkfud fcanq ij izdk’k ugha Mkyk gSA 5- izdj.k lexz :i ls lw{e foospuk djus ds i’pkr~ iz’uk/khu izdj.k esa nksuksa v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa ds leorhZ fu”d”kZ gksus ds dkj.k mlesa gLr{ksi djus dh dksbZ vko’;drk ugha gSA izLrqr vihy fujLr dh tkrh gSA vihy [kkfjt