MULTAN SINGH Vs. SATPAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Whether the findings of the Courts below holding the registered Will dated 06.02.1996 (Ex.P1) to be non-genuine, are based on misinterpretation and misreading of evidence."

(2.) The above substantial question of law arises for determination in this appeal. Brief Facts:- The appellant filed a suit for declaration that he along with defendants-respondents No.3 and 4 is owner in possession of the suit land as fully described in the head note of the plaint on the basis of registered Will dated 06.02.1996 executed by Jaisi Ram, father of appellant and respondent No.3 and husband of Smt. Achari Devi. During the pendency of appeal, Smt. Achari Devi died. As no relief was claimed against her, she was given up as respondent No.4.

(3.) Admittedly, Jaisi Ram was owner of the suit property. He died in the year 1998. The case of the appellant-plaintiff is that during his life time Jaisi Ram executed a registered Will dated 06.02.1996 in favour of appellant and respondents No.3 and 4 in lieu of services rendered to him. Defendants-respondents No.1 and 2 were married more than 20 years ago and were living with their family and never served Jaisi Ram in his old age. They even did not attend the marriage of younger sister of appellant namely Sarjiwan Kumari and got the mutation of the estate of Jaisi Ram sanctioned on the basis of intestate succession compelling the appellant to file the suit.