JUDGMENT

Markandey Katju, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The facts of the case are that the respondent herein Chandrika filed a suit before the Sub Judge, Kottayam, Kerala, alleging that her father Raghavan died intestate on 18.06.1984.

The plaintiff alleged that the defendants wererelying on the will dated 14.06.1984 which was not agenuine will of Raghvan. On the other hand, the defendants alleged that the will was genuine. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 07.09.1994 held that the defendants failed to prove that the will in question was a true and genuine will of Raghavan.

3. Consequently, the trial court decreed the suit of Chandrika. The appellant herein challenged the judgment of the trial court in an appeal which came up before a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court. One of the Hon'ble Judges who heard the appeal was of the view that the will was genuine while the other held that it was not. Consequently the Division Bench by its judgment and order dated20.08.2004 dismissed the appeal relying on Section 98 (2)CPC.It is this judgment and order which is challenged before us.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since there was a difference of