Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhola Ram And Others vs Mukesh Devi And Others on 21 October, 2022
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.
1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 22-10-2022 05:56:48 ::: 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 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 22-10-2022 05:56:49 ::: 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 Chand, Sarpanch of village Tajnagar, District Gurgaon stated that marriage between Mukesh Devi and Ramesh Chand was solemnised on 6.2.2005 in presence of friends and relatives. It was a Karewa marriage. In the said marriage, appellant-plaintiff Kali Charan was also present. DW-5 Raj Pal son of Shiv Lal also stated that karewa marriage was solemnised between Ramesh Chand and Mukesh Devi on 6.2.2005 in presence of relatives and friends. From their wedlock one female child Deepanshi was born on 8.9.2006.
22. The above oral evidence further substantiated with the documentary evidence produced by the respondents-defendants Ex.D1 is the birth certificate of Deepika. This document shows that it was issued by competent authority namely Assistant Registrar (Birth and Death). According to this document, Deepika was born on 17.4.2004 out of union of Narender and Mukesh Devi. Meaning thereby, one female child was born out of the wedlock of Narender and Mukesh Devi, who was named as Deepika. Another birth certificate Ex. D2 issued by Registrar, Birth and Death, Badshahpur, Gurgaon shows that defendant no.2 Deepanshi was born on 8.9.2006 out of the wedlock of Ramesh Chand and Mukesh Devi at Village Tikli. Ex. D3 is the residence certificate which shows that defendant no.1 Mukesh Devi obtained the Haryana Residence Certificate on 25.2.2011 from Tehsil Gurgaon in which she has been shown as wife of Ramesh Chand, village and PO Tikli. This document was issued on the verification of Sarpanch/Patwari. Defendants also produced on record photographs Ex.D5 to Ex.D11. A con-joint examination of these photographs reveals that marriage was solemnized between Ramesh Chand and Mukesh Devi. Defendant no.1 has also started receiving widow pension from Government of Haryana. The document Ex.D13 establishes on 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 22-10-2022 05:56:49 ::: RSA No. 5111 of 2019 (O & M) 4 the record that she used to receive pension being widow of Ramesh Chand.
7. It has also been held by the Courts below that parties belong to 'Yadav' caste, which is an agricultural community in the State of Haryana, and such marriages are performed amongst agricultural communities in order to give protection to a lady who lost her husband. Besides, no evidence has been adduced by the plaintiffs that Ramesh Chand was not a collateral of Narender, the first husband of defendant no.1.
8. In view of the aforesaid well-reasoned findings based on evidence, there is no escape from conclusion that kareva marriage, in fact, was performed between defendant no.1 and Ramesh Chand on 6.2.2005, and defendant no.2 was born out of their wedlock.
9. There is no ground to interfere with the judgments passed by the Courts below. No substantial question arises for consideration. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 21.10.2022 A w Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 22-10-2022 05:56:49 :::