SHARMILA Vs. SATPAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present appeal has been directed against concurrent findings recorded by the Courts whereby suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction by assailing Will dated 19.11.1991, purported to be executed by Baljeet Singh (since deceased), to be null and void, thus, is not binding on rights of the respondents/plaintiffs was dismissed by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 01.03.2014 that came to be affirmed in appeal by the Additional District Judge, Karnal vide judgment and decree dated 04.02.2015.

(2.) As per case set up by the appellant/plaintiff, Baljeet Singh son of Antu Ram son of Khem Lal was a Government employee in Education Department and owned agricultural land, residential house, baras as well as movable assets. Plaintiffs No.l to 4 and defendants No.l and 2 are successors-in-interest of Khem Lal who had two sons namely Singhu and Antu. Singhu had a son namely Amar Singh. Antu performed first marriage with Surji and then kareva marriage with Manhori.

(3.) The plaintiffs challenged Will dated 19.11.1991 on the ground that Baljeet Singh was suffering from acute chronic kidney disease which severely affected his mental faculties and he was not in a position to exercise his discretion. The Will is said to be the result of fraud played upon Baljeet Singh who died on 03.09.2002. There was no occasion for Baljeet Singh to execute the Will in favour of defendants No. 1 and 2, in preference to his natural heirs. Baljeet Singh solemnized marriage with Sharmila who had a son namely Ravi from her previous husband, later adopted by Baljeet Singh.