Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no.1 on this miscellaneous appeal. None turned up on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 5 to advance the argument in the case, despite service of notice and putting appearance in the case.

2. This miscellaneous appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 16.12.2013 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Gaya in Title Suit No.04 of 1992, whereby the learned lower Court allowed the probate petition of respondent no.1 to grant probate of will dated 04.05.1984 finding the same as genuine.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that respondent no.1 filed petition to grant probate in respect of will dated 04.05.1984 executed by Sheo Barat Singh in his favour with the case that the said Sheo Barat Singh had executed a will in his favour on 07.05.1984. The said Sheo Barat Singh had died on 07.07.1984 during course of treatment. He has executed the said will out of his sweet will and fully understanding the same in his good health and mind. The said will is his last will. Appellant who happens to be one of the daughters of Sheo Barat Singh and respondent nos.2 to 5 filed