RAJU SINGH Vs. ANYBODY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, 'the Act of 1925') for assailing the impugned order dated 17th of December 2007, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Bali, District Pali camp Sumerpur (for short, 'the learned trial Court'), whereby the learned trial Court has declined to issue probate to the appellants for a Will dated 27th of February 2001 executed by Smt. Suraj Kanwar in their favour for her entire movable and immovable properties.

(2.) THE learned Court below, while rejecting the prayer of the appellants, has observed in the impugned order that prima facie it appears that the Will has been executed under suspicious circumstances looking to the age of the testator. That apart, the learned trial Court has also observed that the appellants have miserably failed to prove the cause of death of the testator and they have not examined both the attesting witnesses of the Will. The learned trial Court, before deciding the petition for issuance of probate, affixed the notice of the petition on the notice board of the Court, and at a conspicuous place within the Panchayat area where the deceased testator was residing. Besides these requirements, the requisite notice was also published in the daily newspaper "Dainik Bhaskar" dated 24th of January 2007 inviting objections. However, despite publishing notice, no objection was submitted. Although there was no objection submitted against the issuance of probate, the learned trial Court rejected the petition of the appellants for probate.

(3.) ON 19th of February 2010, when the January 2010. matter came up before this Court, the following order was made: