In a Court of Probate, the genuineness of a will is determined based on the evidence of due execution and attestation, and circumstances cannot be considered in the abstract to conclude that the will is not genuine.

U.N.Sinha, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants whose application for letters of administration of a will, dated 21-2-54 has been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge of Shahabad. On 15-2-55, the appellants had filed a petition for grant of a probate of the will of one Komal Singh, dated 21-2-54, Komal Singh having died on 20-6-54. The objector to this application was one Mosammat Rajeshwari Kuer, who has described herself as the widow of Komal Singh deceased. Ultimately, by an order dated 14-9-59, the applicants for probate were permitted to amend their petition, describing it as a petition for probate or letters of Administration.

2. On objection having been filed by Mosammat Rajeshwari Kuer, the case was numbered as Title Suit No. 9 of 1955 __________ 1 of 1959. The facts are these. According to the two plaintiffs, Komal Singh was their maternal uncle and he had executed the will in question on 21-2-54 with respect to the properties mentioned therein. It was alleged that Komal Singh was then in a sound state of body and mind and that he had executed the will after being fully aware of its contents. The will was duly attested by witnesses and, therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to probate or letters of Administration in respect of the will.

3. The case of Mosammat Rajeshwari Kuer was as follows. It was alleged that she was the widow ot Komal Singh and one Chandra Singh was the adopted son of Komal Singh. It was alleged that the plaintiffs were not the bhaginas of Komal Singh. According to her case, the will in question was a forged and fabricated document and it was not properly executed or attested. It was contended that there were circumstances to show that no will could have been executed by Komal Singh in. favour of the petitioners. According to Mosammat Rajeshwari Kuer, Komal Singh had no property left with him at the time of his death and, therefore, there was nothing to administer.

4. On the allegations of the parties, the following three issues were framed by the learned trial judge, viz.;

1. Was the will duly executed and was the testator (Komal Singh) of sound mind at the time he executed the will?

2. Is the will a valid and genuine document?

3. Are the plaintiffs entitled to any probate of the will or letters of Administration?

5. With respect to issue No. 1, it was not disputed on behalf of Mossammat Rajeshwari Kuer, that, Komal Singh was of sound mind at the time of the execution of the alleged will on the 21st February 1954. This issue has, therefore, been answered in favour of the appellants. Issue No. 2 has been answered in the negative, the learned judge having held that the appellants had failed to prove that the will in question was a genuine document and that it had been executed by Komal Singh, issue No. 3 has, therefore, been decided against the appellants.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the learned Judge was in error in holding that the appellants had not been able to prove that the will in question was a genuine document and that it had been duly executed by Komal Singh. It is urged that the evidence of the witnesses examined on behalf of the appellants to prove due execution of the will should have been accepted, as there is no reason to hold that these witnesses have come forward to give false testimony in the case. Learned counsel has urged that, as a matter of fact, the evidence of P. Ws. 1,2 and 3, who are the material witnesses in this case, have really been rejected by the learned Judge, on what he has stated as circumstances, going to prove that it was unlikely that Komal Singh would have executed a will in favour of the appellants. According to learned Counsel, if there is nothing against the evidence of the relevant witnesses to reject their testimony, investigation into circumstances, to arrive at the genuineness or otherwise of a will, is foreign to the scope before the court and the learned trial judge has committed an