( 1 ) I have read the draft judgment of my learned Brother and I agree with His Lordship's findings and ordering portion. However, I wish to add few words to supplement with the risk of slight repetition. In this appeal the question is whether the learned Trial Judge has rightly accepted the document dated 15th August, 1971 said to be the last Will and testament of one Sadhan Pakrashi as a genuine and lawful testamentary instrument or not. The learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. S. P. Roy chowdhury urges that had the learned Judge read evidence carefully he could have found the document is a manufactured and forged one and further it was executed under suspicious circumstances. Though such plea is not taken but after reading of the document with the evidence adduced by both the parties it will appear that this document cannot be of Sadhan Pakrashi's. Mr. Roy Chowdhury contends further that the grantee is 'an interested person' and there was no reason to exclude the appellants who are the nephews of the testator. His further contention is that it will appear from the evidences of the witnesses cited by the defendants appellants viz. D. W. I, d. W. 2 and D. W.