SMT. UTTAMI Vs. SHRI RAM DASS ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 30 -8 -1973 passed by a single Judge of this Court whereby he affirmed on appeal the judgment and order, dated 10 -4 -1970, granting a probate with a copy of the will annexed thereto to Ram Dass Advocate, who was appointed as an executor under the will dated 9 -5 -1961 executed by late Mr. H. M. Banon.

(2.) Mr. II. M. Banon, who had settled down in Manali, first executed a will, Exhibit P. 4, on 9 -5 -1961, appointing Thakur Ram Dass, Pleader, Kulu, to be the sole executor of the will. Mr. Banon died on 13 -11 -1963. Thereafter the executor filed an application under Sec. 2/6 of the Indian Succession Act on 22 -8 -1964 for the probate of the will. It was alleged that he (Mr. Banan) was a Cristian and was governed by the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, and he made the last will on 9 -5 -1961 appointing him as the sole executor thereof and the will was executed and signed by Mr. Banon in the presence of Sarvshri Bhagwat Guru and Panchhi Ram, as the attesting witnesses to the will. Thereafter the will was deposited with the Registrar on the same day by Mr. Banon.

(3.) Out of the six Respondents arrayed by the Petitioner, only Smt. Uttami contested the petition making the following allegations. Although Mr. Banon was Christian by birth he was a Hindu in status by adopting Hindu religion. On 9 -5 -1961 and even before that Mr. Banon had no sound disposing mind owing to his long illness and old age. He was not in a fit state of health to execute a valid will. The will was not genuine or the last will of the deceased. The alleged attesting witnesses of the will were the men of the Petitioner, who himself was also connected with Respondents 2 to 5. She was the wife of the deceased and with the intention to deprive her of the property of the deceased the will in question was prepared and set up by the Petitioner and Respondents 2 to 5 collusively with each other. Besides, the other near heirs of Mr. Banon namely, his brothers and nephews were not given any share in the property. It was also contended that Ruldu Ram, his servant, got a major share which was again an unnatural feature of the will.