The main legal point established in the judgment is the legal requirements for proving the validity of a Will, the need to remove suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, and the essential characteristics of a Will as per Section 61 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

1. R.S.A.No.831/2010 is directed against the judgment and decree in R.A. No. 3/2002 dated 2G. 11.2009 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, D.K., Mangalore and R.S.A.No.832/2010 is directed against the judgment and decree in R.A.No. 19/2002 on the file of the same Court.

2. G.Jayalaxmi Rao, D/o. late Ratnakar Rao, filed O.S.No.343/ 1986 on the file of II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and C.J.M., Mangalore, for partition and separate possession of her 1/6-h share in the suit schedule properties. The suit schedule properties belong to her father late G.Ratnakar Rao. According to her, first defendant Smt. G.Shambhavi Rao, was the wife of late Ratnakar Rao. Defendant Nos.2 to 5 namely, G.Vijayaiaxmi Rao; G.Anuradha Rao; G.Veena Rao and G.Sudhir Rao, are her sisters and brother. Sixth defendant Smt.Gulabi is not entitled to any share/interest in the suit schedule properties. She is making attempt for taking possession of the said properties. Hence, she is also made a party to the suit.

3. Defendant No.1 - Smt.G.Shambhavi Rao has filed written statement contending that defendant No.6 has no right whatsoever in the suit schedule properties. Ratnakar Rao had executed a Will dated 15.5.1980 bequeathing the entire properties in her favour. Therefore, the suit schedule properties are not available for partition.

4. Defendant No.6 has filed written statement contending that the suit is a collusive one and speculative and manipulated to make unlawful gains. She had filed a suit O.S.No.319/ 1983 on the file of the I Addl. Munsiff, Mangalore, against the first defendant for declaration and permanent injunction. In the said suit, the Court below has held that the first defendant was not the wife of late G. Ratnakar Rao and she was held to be the wife of late G.Ratnakar Rao. She has denied the execution of the Will by G.Ratnakar Rao.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the par ties, the trial Court has framed issues. The trial Court on appreciation of the materials on record has held that the Will said to have been executed by late G.Ratnakar Rao is not valid. The trial Court has declared that G.Shambhavi Rao, is legally wedded wife of late G.Ratnanakar Rao.

6. G. Shambhavi Rao, filed an appeal R.A.No.3/2002 challenging the findings of the trial Court in relation to the Will - Ex.D.6. Smt.Gulabi G. Rao, filed RA No. 19/2002 challenging the judgment and decree of the trial Court, wherein it has been held that Smt.G.Shambhavi Rao, is the legally wedded wife of late G.Ratnakar Rao.

7. G.Shambhavi Rao, also filed R.A.No.724/2004 challenging the judgment and decree in O.S.No.319/1983 dated 30.8.1986 wherein the trial Court had granted an order of injunction in favour of Smt.Gulabi Rao in respect of the suit schedule properties, which has been dismissed. It is not in dispute that Smt.G.Shambhavi Rao challenged the judgment and decree in RA No. 724/2004 dated 26.11.2009 in R.S.A.No,833/2010 and that the second appeal has been dismissed on 7.10.2013 as having become infructuous

8. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants in both these appeals is that the Court below is not justified in holding that the Will executed by G.Ratnakar Rao at Ex.D6 dated 15.5.1980 is not a valid Will. It is argued that the first defendant/appellant herein has produced sufficient material to establish that the Will is a valid Will. It is further contended that the trial Court has rightly held that the appellant was the legally wedded wife of Late G.Ratnakar Rao. The first appellate Court has reversed the said finding without any basis and has further erred in holding that Smi. Gulabi Rao was the legally wedded wife of Late G.Ratnakar Rao.

9. Having regard to the contentions urged, the first question for consideration is: whether the first appellate Court is justified in holding that Smt G. Shambhavi Rao is not the legally wedded wife of G.Ratnakar Rao?

10. Gulabi Rao has deposed before the trial Court that her marriage with G. Ratnakar Ra