JUDGMENT

1. This second appeal preferred by the appellants/defendants herein was admitted for hearing on the following two substantial question of law :

''1. Whether both the Courts below were justified in arriving at a finding that Dariyavsingh was not competent to sell his undivided share ?

2. Whether both the Courts below were justified in holding that will executed by Phafibai was not genuine ?''

(For the sake of convenience, parties would be referred hereinafter as per their status and ranking shown in the suit before the trial Court.)

2. The following genealogical tree would demonstrate the relationship between the parties :

3. The suit property (land as well as house) mentioned in Schedule ''A'' and ''B'' annexed with the plaint situated at Village Takam, Tahsil Berla was originally held by Dariyav Singh. He and his wife Phafibai had two sons namely defendant No. 1 - Hinchharam and Guharam; and two daughters namely defendant No. 4 - Kaijabai and defendant No. 5 - Dheliyabai. The three plaintiffs are widow and daughters of Late Guharam. Defendants No. 2, 3 and 6 are Hinchharam''s sons namely Churaman, Khemraj and Dilip respectively.

4. Plaintiffs filed a civil suit only for po