(1). THIS first appeal has been preferred by the appellant viz. Pasupati Paul, against the judgment dated 11th June, 2001of the Second Court of Additional district and Sessions Judge at Barasat, North 24 Parganas, in original suit No. 2 of 1994 granting letters of administration over the estate of Kalipada Paul @ Kali charan Paul by virtue of his Will dated 21st March 1983.

(2). THE case of the original petitioner, Kanan Bala Paul, the predecessor of the present petitioners in the Court below is that the said Kalipada Paul @ Kali charan Paul executed his last Will written in Bengali on 21st March, 1983 and he died ultimately on 26th January, 1988 at Chittaranjan Medical College and hospital, Calcutta? 14 while living at Natagarh, Ram Krishna Sarada Road, P. S. Khardah, Dist. North 24 Parganas. He left behind the original petitioner, namely, Kanan Bala Paul, his second wife, as the executrix of the Will and the four sons and two daughters through such second wife and three sons and two daughters through his first wife including Pasupati Paul, the present appellant, that is to mean he left behind altogether 12 heirs including the second wife.

The said executrix prayed for probate in respect of schedule a property to the application and the expenses for funeral and sradh ceremony to the tune of Rs. 7000/-being shown under schedule b.

(3). WHILE the application for probate of the said Will filed by Kanan Bala Paul was pending, she died leaving behind four sons and two daughters who were substituted and those substituted heirs prayed for letters of administration over the said estate under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act by way of converting the prayer originally made by their predecessor. The three sons and two daughters of the first wife were made opposite parties to the proceedings.

(4). THE present appellant, Pasupati Paul, contested the case in the Court below by filing a written statement, inter alia, contending that the said testator did not execute any Will and that the writings sought to be passed through as a will was not genuine. It was alleged that the said Will was never executed by Kalipada Paul and the same was a forged and fraudulent document manufactured for the purpose of grabbing the property of the testator. According to the appellant-objector, the said Will was wholly unnatural. His father had much affection towards him, he being the eldest son. The stepbrothers instigated kalipada Paul in different ways to create a bitter relation with him and even they assaulted him but ultimately, before the death of Kalipada Paul, the objector developed good relation with him. His father gave him some properties measuring about 10 cottahs of land and 6 feet wide road by way of a "salisnama" dated 20th July,1987 in presence of the police which was diarized under entry No. 1557 dated 20th July, 1987 at Kharda P. S.

(5). THE learned Court below framed as many as nine issues and examined kanan Bala Paul, the original applicant as P.W. 1, Abhoy Paul, the petitioner No. 2, as P. W. 2 and one Bidesh Paul as P.W. No. 3. While Pasupati Paul, the appellant deposed as O. P. W. 1 and one Laksmi Paul figured as O.P. W. 2 to oppose the grant. It may be mentioned in this connection that Kanan Bala Paul, the PW-1, died before the completion of her cross-examination and her deposition was expunged vide order dated 10th November,1998.

(6). THE learned Court below was of the view that the salisnama could not pass any title in favour of the appellant unless it was based upon a registered document. The learned Court below was also of the opinion that under the Indian law, it was not mandatory that the testator should sign in presence of the attesting witnesses and all that was required under Section 63 of the Indian succession Act 1925 was that the signature of the executant must be on the Will at the time of attestation and the testator must acknowledge either expressly or by necessary implication the said signature to be