SATISH KUMAR GROVER Vs. SURINDER KUMAR GROVER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The parties to this litigation are closely related. It appears from the record that the deceased Smt Sheelawati had three sons and four daughters. Allegedly, she had a property which was tenanted with one Naval Kishore Jain. It is stated that on 6/2/1989, she made a Will in favour of her husband bequeathing the tenanted property to him absolutely. It also transpires that on 10/5/1989, she made another Will in respect of the same property in favour of Surinder Kumar, one of her sons, to the exclusion of her husband and her other two sons and four daughters.

(3.) On the basis of the Will dated 10/5/1989, Surinder Kumar, the respondent herein, moved the Rent court for eviction of the tenant on the ground of his being in arrears of rent on account of default in timely payment thereof. Amongst others, the tenant raised the objection that he did not accept Surinder Kumar as his landlord pleading that there were six other heirs of the landlady who had succeeded to her estate. The trial court directed that those six left-outs be impleaded as parties to the eviction " petition. The High court in revision made an order to the contrary on the basis of proceedings which took place in the Probate court, which has adistinct facet. There, it appears that the father of the parties who had projected Will dated 6/2/1989 in his favour made a statement that in the presence of the Will dated 10/5/1989, he was withdrawing claim to probate the Will in his favour, but it is otherwise the admitted position that probate proceedings regarding Will dated 10/5/1989 continue, in which all the natural heirs of the legator are parties, where the question of the validity of the Will has arisen, as the left-out heirs have pleaded that the Will is a forgery.