PURUSHOTTAM HARIBHAU PIJGADE Vs. AMBADAS SITARAMJI PAJGADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal, at the in-stance of original plaintiffs, is directed against judgment and order dated 23.1.1998 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 93 of 1994 by learned Additional District Judge, Yavatmal allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and de-cree granted by the trial Court.

(2.) The substantial question of law framed in this appeal is, whether in the facts and circumstances, the lower Appellate Court was justified in rejecting the plaintiffs' claim based on the Will on the ground that the Will suf-fered from suspicious circumstances and that it was not proved to be validly executed Will. The answer must be in the negative for rea-sons to follow.

(3.) At the outset, it must be stated that it is settled legal position that attestation of the will is not an empty formality. It means sign-ing a document for the purpose of testifying of the signature of the executant/testator. The attesting witness should put his signa-ture on the will animo attestandi. It is not necessary that more than one witness be present at the same time and no particular form of attestation is necessary. Since a will is required by law to be attested, its execu-tion has to be proved in the manner laid down in section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act.