CHARAN DASS Vs. PIARA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiff's second appeal.

(2.) BOTH the Courts below on appreciation of evidence on record have accepted registered will dated 9.1.1987 executed by Rakha Ram in favour of defendants. In this second appeal, it is contended by counsel for plaintiff that only one attesting witness was examined to prove the Will and that witness has not supported the case of defendants in regard to execution of Will. I find no merit in this contention of counsel for plaintiff. Both the Courts below on going through the statement of only attesting witness have given a concurrent finding of fact that he made a false statement as he had been won over by the plaintiff. In fact, the said witness denied his thumb-impression on the Will, but when his thumb-impression was got compared with the impression on the Will, it was found that Will bears his thumb-impression. Will has been proved by the Scribe who had signed the Will after the testator as well as the attesting witnesses had put their signatures on the Will. Will has also been proved by the Sub Registrar in whose presence the testator and two attesting witnesses appeared and admitted the execution of Will and also signed on the endorsement on the Will. Statements of the Scribe as well as of the Sub Registrar have been believed by both the Courts below. Accordingly, there being no infirmity in the finding so recorded by the Courts below, no interference is called for in second appeal. Appeal is dismissed.