( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from a decree granting probate.

( 2 ) THE Will was executed by one Gayaram in March 1968 and he expired in April, 1969.

( 3 ) THE two executrices are his two daughters-in-law kalate Devi and Mandadari Devi, wives of Fagulat and Asorfilal.

( 4 ) THE executrices are also the beneficiaries. The Will has disinherited the eldest son Motilal, who is the caveator/appellant. The Will states that Gayaram did not have good relationship with any of his sons and that is the reason of the above bequest.

( 5 ) THE above Caveator alleged that the Will was a product of fraud or undue influence. Also, in arguments, heavy reliance was played upon circumstances which were said to be suspicious. The first and foremost of those is a long gap of nearly 18 years before the Will was presented for probate. The other fact was that Fagulal was an attesting witness. It was also said that by reason of the extreme physical infirmity of Gayaram before his death he did not have proper mental capacity for executing his Will.

( 6 ) ON the part of the propounder it was shown that the Will had been properly attested; one Nani Bhusan Guha, the lawyer, gave evidence stati