1. One Mr. Subhash Hiraji Jadhav and Mrs. Kumud Subhash Jadhav filed petition No.603 of 1990 for Letters of Administration with a Will annexed in regard to the Will purported to have been executed by Hiroo alias Hiraji Laxman Jadhav on 3rd December, 1988. After the filing of the petition, citations were served upon the heirs of said Hiroo alias Hiraji Laxman Jadhav (hereinafter referred to as the "said deceased"). In all four persons i.e. Padmakar, present defendant, Smt.Indira, Mrs.Sumitra and Mrs.Meghana filled caveat jointly. Present defendant No.1 Mr. Padmakar filed affidavit in support of the caveat for himself and on behalf of other caveators. It is in these circumstances, office while converting the testamentary petition in the suit showed the name of Padmakar H. Jadhav and others as the defendants. Hence, to the present suit Padmakar Hiraji Jadhav would be defendant No.1, Smt. Indira Jadhav (since deceased) would be defendant No.2, Smt. Sumitra (correct name Sunetra S. Surve) would be defendant No.3 and Mrs. Meghana Vasant Shinde would be defendant No.4.

2. In the affidavit in support of the caveat, with a view to oppose the grant of the petition following points were raised.

(i) The purported Will is not the Will as per the law. (ii) The deceased was not in sound state of mind. (iii) The deceased was controlled by Subhash Jadhav and present petitioner No.1 Mrs. Kumud. (iv) The Will was executed under force and coercion. (v) There was no reason to deprive Smt. Indira and unmarried daughter Shubhangi who is now known as Mrs.Sunetra. (vi) The Will is forged and fabricated.

3. It is required to be mentioned that during the pendency of this suit, Subhash Jadhav, original petitioner No.1 expired. He left behind him Mrs. Kumud and Akhilesh his son. Consequently, name of Akhilesh was brought on record as petitioner. Based on the text of the petition as well as affidavit in support of the caveat, following issues came to be framed on 19th December, 2007.

ISSUES FINDINGS

1. Whether the Will dated 3rd December, 1988 is the last In the affirmative Will and testament of Hiroo alias Hiraji L. Jadhav and the same is legally and validly executed by him?

2. Do the defendants prove that the subject Will is In the negative forged and fabricated by the plaintiffs?

3. What order?

As per final Decree. My answer to each of the issue is mentioned as against the respective issues.

4. At trial on behalf of the plaintiffs, Smt. Kumud S. Jadhav plaintiff No.1 gave evidence. Attesting witness of the said Will dated 3rd December, 1988 by name Mr. Jayant C. Kamani gave evidence as PW-2. No other witness was examined on behalf of plaintiffs. On behalf of the defendants, defendant No.1 Mr. Padmakar H. Jadhav son of the deceased gave evidence as DW-1. Mrs. Sunetra S. Surve daughter of the deceased gave evidence as DW-2. Mrs. Sunetra was unmarried in December, 1988 and her maiden name was Shubhangi and a reference to her is found in the text of the Will. No other witness was examined on behalf of the defendants.

5. Before I proceed to deal with the issues, it would be convenient to narrate certain persons who figure in the entire matter. Subhash H. Jadhav original plaintiff No.1 and defendant No.1 Padmakar H. Jadhav are the sons of the deceased, out of which Subhash died during the pendency of the suit. Smt. Indira was wife of the deceased who died after the deceased during the pendency of the suit. Mrs.Meghana is the married daughter of the deceased, Mrs. Sunetra (nee Kum.Shubhangi) is the daughter of the deceased. Mrs. Kumud, present plaintiff No.1 is the daughter-in-law of the deceased and Akhilesh plaintiff No.2 is the grand son of the deceased. Advocate Mr.A.G.Shah who is referred to in the evidence is the advocate who is said to act as an attested witness and who is said to have prepared the Will at the instance of the deceased. Mr. Jayant Kamani an attesting witness has been family friend of deceased.

6. I have extensively heard learn