MADHU GHANSHYAM HINGORANI Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BACKGROUND:

(2.) The learned District Judge has dismissed the appellant's petition on two grounds. First, that the appellant has not been able to discharge the onus placed on her with regard to the execution of the Will. This, conclusion, has been reached by the learned District Judge based on the testimony of one, Mr. Shailender Bhardwaj (PW2), who was one of the persons who had attested the Will. Second, the petitioner had not impleaded the brother of the deceased testatrix. This conclusion has been reached in paragraph 16 of the impugned judgment. Though, the name of the brother is not given in the impugned judgment, one can safely assume, it could only allude to the husband of the appellant, who was not formally impleaded as a respondent along with other siblings in the probate action.

(3.) In this context, the following brief facts are required to be noticed :-