SUSHILA SAXENA Vs. SUB REGISTRAR SHAHJAHANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. S. Sinha, J. Heard Sri Janardan Sahai, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinay Malaviya, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent No. 1. No body has appeared for Sri Ashok Kumar Saxena & Sri Shushil Kumar, the contesting private respondents No. 2 & 3, respectively.

(2.) RELEVANT facts, giving rise to instant petition, are these: Sri Daya Shanker Saxena, Advocate, the father of the respondents No. 2 and 3, brother of the petitioner, hereinafter called the Testator', executed a Will in respect of dwelling situate in Mohalla Katia Tola, Shahjahanpur in favour of the respondents No. 2 and 3, Upon the death of testator the respon dents No. 2 and 3 presented the Will before sub-Registrar of Shahjahanpur, the respon dent No. 1. for registration thereof. During the proceedings for posthu mous registration of the Will before the respondent No. 1, Km. Shushila Saxena, the sister of the testator, Smt. Mohan Pyari, wife of the brother of the testator, and Km. Saroj Saxena, the niece of the testator, in sisted to participate in the proceedings and object to the registration of the Will. They made an application supported by affidavit praying that they be impleaded as they were necessary parties to the proceedings of post humous registration of the Will. The claim for impleadment and right to participate in the proceedings and object the registration of the Will was asserted on the ground that the house in respect whereof Will was ex ecuted by the testator belonged to the mother of testator; and that the testator had no legal authority to execute the Will. They also asserted that the Will was not executed by the testator; and that the Will did not contain his signature. According to them, signature of the testator appearing on the will was forged. It appears that the respondent No. 1 did not allow the petitioner and other objec tors either to be impleaded or to participate in the proceedings for posthumous registra tion or the Will. Smt. Mohan Pyari and Km. Saroj Saxena have acquiesced. However, feeling aggrieved by her exclusion from participa tion in the proceedings for posthumous registration of the will petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and urges it to intervene in the matter.

(3.) ACCORDING to sub-section (1) of Sec tion 41 of the Act, a Will presented by the testator has to be registered by the register ing authority in the same manner as any other document i. e. after complying the provisions of Sections 32, 33, 34 and 35 of the Act.