DHAN RAJ ALIAS TEK CHAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Probate is sought of a Will dated 7th May, 1964 and registered with the office of the sub-registrar, Delhi as document No. 68 in book No. 3, Volume No. 10 at pages 45 to 47 on 12th May, 1964, of one Smt Shimli widow of Shri Lal Singh, resident of village Madipur, Delhi who died on 10th January, 1973. The said Smt shimli was a Hindu. Her husband had pre-deceased her. She left only two children, namely, two daughters i. e. , Smt Kishan Dei and Smt Santra. The petitioners are the two sons of Smt Kishan Dei daughter of deceased Smt Shimli. The petitioners alongwith their brother Shri Dayachand who has been impleaded as the respondent claimed to be the beneficiaries under the Will of which probate is sought, The natural heirs of the deceased Smt Shimli, namely, Kishan Dei and smt Santra have also been impleaded as the respondents. The petition was filed after nearly 15 years of the death of Smt Shimli, stating that the petitioners learnt of the Will only in September 1988 when Shri Mahipal Singh Chauhan handed over the Will to the petitioners. In compliance of Section 281 of the Indian succession Act, affidavit of one of the attesting witnesses to the will was filed alongwith petition.

(2.) NOTICE and citation of the petition was issued. The brother and mother of the petitioners, impleaded as respondents No. 2 and 3 filed their no objections to the grant of probate. The respondent No. 4 Smt Santra filed her objections and to which reply was filed by the petitioners. Respondent No. 4 Smt santra in her objections did not dispute the residence of the deceased Smt shimli at Delhi, did not dispute the date of demise of Smt Shimli and admitted that Smt Shimli was a Hindu and left only two natural heirs i. e. , her daughters smt Kishan Dei (mother of the petitioners) and Smt Santra. It was further stated that the respondent No. 4 Smt Santra though married was not living with her husband and was living with her mother Smt Shimli and enjoyed a good relationship with her; that Mr Ami Chand being the husband of Smt Kishan Dei the other daughter of the deceased Smt Shimli always had an eye on the property of smt Shimli and wanted to grab the said property. It was stated that Smt Shimli had never executed any Will and the Will dated 7th May, 1964 had been forged and got registered from some lady impersonating to be Smt Shimli. It was further averred that in the year 1964 Smt Shimli was too old and mentally weak and was not of sound disposing mind.

(3.) THE petitioners filed their reply to the aforesaid objections in which they stated that, in fact, both Smt Shimli and the respondent No. 4 Smt Santra who was separated from her husband were living in the house of the petitioners only. It was further stated that Smt Shimli always wanted to leave her properties to the sons of her daughter Smt Kishan Dei and succession certificate had also been obtained by Smt Kishan Dei and to which no objection had been issued by Smt Santra.