ASHOK KUMAR Vs. KANCHAN BEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Sec. 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 ('the Act') has been filed by the appellant aggrieved against the dismissal of his petition for grant of probate under Sec. 276 of the Act regarding will dt. 10.06.1982 said to have been executed by Indermal. The facts in brief are that the appellant Ashok Kumar claiming himself to be the adopted son of deceased Indermal, who died on 11.06.1982 at Bhilwara, filed application on 02.01.1992 for grant of probate of will dt. 10.06.1982 said to have been executed by deceased Indermal. The appellant did not implead any one as party respondent to his application and when notice of the application was published in the news -paper, respondents No. 1 to 3 Smt. Kanchan Ben, Smt. Manbhar Jain and Smt. Prem Devi filed objections to the grant of probate. It was inter -alia submitted that the so -called will dt. 10.06.1982 was forged and concocted as deceased Indermal was seriously ill on 10.06.1982 and was unconscious and died on 11.06.1982 at 11:00 a.m. Before death when said Indermal was in better condition, he had executed a will on 05.06.1982 in favour of the said objectors and Smt. Gishi Bai, mother of the appellant -applicant Ashok Kumar. As deceased had no son he executed the will in favour of his four daughters i.e. the 3 objectors and mother of applicant -Ashok Kumar. Several circumstances raising suspicion on the will dt. 10.06.1982 were also indicated. It was inter -alia submitted that litigations regarding the property of Indermal were pending in which objectors and Smt. Gishi Bai were impleaded as parties and they received their share of the mortgage money and gold ornaments left by Indermal were distributed amongst them, the silver left by Indermal was sold by Smt. Gishi Bai and the amount was spent for the last rites of the deceased. The appellant was aware of the litigations, however, no objection was filed by him based on his being adopted son or on account of the will said to have been executed in his favour.

(2.) THE appellant filed his reply to the objections and contested the claim of the respondents regarding execution of will dt. 05.06.1982 in their favour. The fact of his adoption was reiterated and it was denied that he had any knowledge about the litigation as he lives separately from his mother.

(3.) AFTER hearing the parties, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the adoption of the appellant to deceased Indermal was not proved; the will said to have been executed in favour of the appellant Ashok Kumar was shrouded by suspicious circumstances, Will dt. 05.06.1982 was executed in favour of the Objectors; after death of Indermal, the jewellery was distributed between the daughters and consequently dismissed the application filed by the appellant.