Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. In the present appeal the appellant is challenging the judgment and order dated 8.1.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge I, Chapra in Probate Case No.38 of 2007 by which the court below has refused to grant probate in favour of the appellant.

3. In the present appeal the testator, late Jagdish Singh, has executed a Will in favour of the appellant on 13.11.2003. Claim has been made that the appellant and her husband looking after Jagdish Singh and he out of love and affection looking to the service rendered to him executed the Will and in terms of the Will the right of Jagdish Singh will be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the legatee, Bimla Devi. At the time of execution of the Will Sudama Pandit and Ashok Singh were the attesting witnesses. The Will was scribed by Shiv Dayal Prasad and the testator, namely, Jagdish Singh, died on 10.6.2004. The appellant filed a probate case which was registered as Probate Case No.38 of 2007.

4. When the recitals were published, Uma Devi, has filed a caveat and objection, there the plea was taken that Uma Devi is daughter of late Jagdish Singh. After the death of her mother she was living along with her father and looking after him and was rendering all sorts of service and love to her father. It has further been said that after the death of Jagdish Singh she came in possession of the land and mutation was also done. Uma Devi has claimed that the said Will is fraudulent and manufactured document confer no right and seriously objected granting probate in favour of the appellant.

5. During the trial seven witnesses were examined on behalf of the appellant, namely, A.W.1, Ashok Singh, and A.W.2, Sudama Pandi, are attesting witnesses. A.W.3, Surendra Singh is cousin brother-in-law of Jagdish Singh nephew of Veer Nath Singh, father-in-law of Jagdish Singh. A.W.4, Sukhnandan Singh, resident of the same village. A.W.5, Md. Khalil is co-villager. A.W.6, Bimla Devi, is legatee. A.W.7, Dhirendra Singh, is co-villager who produced mortgaged deed with the conditional sale deed.

6. The respondent, Uma Devi, has also produced ten witnesses, namely, O.P.W.No.1, Ganesh Singh, co-villager of Bimla Devi. O.P.W. No. 2, Bindu Devi, is cousin mother-in-law of Bimla Devi, O.P.W. No. 3 Sarsawati Devi, mother-in-law of Bimla Devi, O.P.W. No. 4, Lal Babu Rai is co-villager. O.P.W. No. 5, Anandi Rai-formal witness, ex-Mukhiya of same Panchayat. O.P.W. No. 6, Kameshwar Rai - a formal witness who has proved doctors prescription. O.P.W. No. 7 Ram Niawash Tiwary, also proved doctors prescription. O.P.W. No. 8 Binay Kumar Singh formal witness who has proved rent receipt. O.P.W. No. 9 Haribansh Singh-son-in-law of Sarsawati Devi (O.P.3). O.P.W. No. 10, Uma Devi-Objector.

7. From the side of the appellant deed of Will has been marked as Ext.1 and from the side of the respondent, certificate of Mukhiya dated 6.8.2005 has been marked as Annexure A certifying that Uma Devi is the daughter of Jagdish Singh, Doctors prescription of Jagdish Singh dated 12.7.2003 has been marked as Ext. B, prescription dated 5.2.2002 of Jagdish Singh has been marked as Exhibit B/1. Rent receipt issued in the name of Uma Devi has been marked as Exhibits C and C/1. Order dated 24.3.2008 passed in Mutation Case No. 3 of 2008 recording the name of Uma Devi by the Revenue Officer has been marked as Ext. D. Genealogical table issued on 19.12.2007 by the Circle Officer has been marked as Exhibit E. Certified copy of registered deed of Will dated 15.1.1974 by Veernath Singh, father-in-law of Jagdish Singh executed the Will in favour of Uma Devi and other co-sharers has been marked as Exhibit F. Show-cause filed in the proceeding under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Sudish Singh, father-in-law of Bimla Devi has been marked as Exhibit G. Police report in the proceeding under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been marked