KASTURIBAI DADARAO WANKHADE Vs. SESHRAO PANDHARI ZAMRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is Second Appeal filed by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the concurrent judgments, whereby the suit brought by her for partition and separate possession has been partly decreed. The trial Court has found that the plaintiff is not entitled to any share in the property of her father by way of inheritance but only on account of Will and, therefore, the trial Court has given her share as per the said Will Exh.-44. The appeal filed by the plaintiff, claiming share as heir and challenging the Will, has been dismissed by the appellate Court by maintaining the judgment and decree of trial Court.

(2.) No substantial question of law has been framed while admitting the appeal on 04.08.1992.

(3.) After hearing Advocate B. T. Patil for the appellant/plaintiff and Advocate C. A. Joshi, Advocate for respondents/defendants, it has become clear that the only substantial question of law sought to be canvassed by the present appellant is; whether Will Exh.-44, used against her in both the Courts below, has been proved as required by Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act