( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional District judge, Delhi in PC No 9/1999, whereby the learned Judge vide his order dated 6th March, 2000 has dismissed the petition of the appellants herein holding that the Will Ex. PW3/1, dated 6th November, 1990 was a suspicious document.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case as has been noted by the Additional District judge are as under : the facts of the above detailed reference petition dated 5th December, 1998 are these, Shri Shadi Lal Sabharwal had died on 13th november, 1990. The deceased executed a Will Ex. PW3/l, dated 6th november, 1990 registered on 8th November, 1990 in regard to his properties in favour of his wife Smt. Kailash Wanti, petitioner No. 2 and his son, Satish Chander Sabharwal, petitioner No. 1. As a matter of fact, he bequeathed life estate only, in favour of petitioner No. 2 in respect with two quarters bearing No. 129 and 130, Vasdev nagar, Andha Mughal, Partap Nagar, Delhi - 110007. He bequeathed the above said two quarters as well as one shop bearing no. 1a, Qutab Road, Delhi - 6 functioning under the name and style of M/s Lok Seva Stores alongwith all the assets and liabilities over the above said properties in favour of his son, petitioner No. 1 It is prayed that consequently, probate be issued in favour of the petitioners according to the Will.

2. Besides the above said two legal heirs, the testator had left behind him, three more sons, namely, Krishan Lai Sabharwal, Ram Chander Sabharwal arid Laxman Chander Sabharwal and three daughters, namely, Smt. Shyama Kumari Juneja, Smt. Veena Talwar a nd Smt. Neena Suri.

( 3 ) SHRI Krishan Lal Sabharwal and Smt. Shyama Kumari Juneja filed no objection/reply to the above said petition.

( 4 ) HOWEVER, Ram Chander Sabharwal, Laxman Chander Sabharwal, smt. Veena Talwar and Smt. Neena Suri have contested the Will and filed different statements. They have voiced the following objections. Will dated 6th November, 1990 mentioned that testator had executed another Will dated 4th June, 1990 Both these Wills are forged, fabricated, concocted and/or in the alternative, obtained by the petitioners through their undue influence and fraud and are not the genuine Wills of the deceased. The deceased was not even medically fit and in sound disposing mind to have made the said alleged Wills. The Will in question makes patently false statements which were admittedly untrue to the knowledge of the deceased. The Will does not mention that the testator was in sound and disposing mind. The Will in question recites that the respondent No. 4 had separated from the deceased in the year 1969 and had started transacting business separately. As a matter of fact and as per stand set up by the deceased in Civil Suit No. 741/90 titled as Shri Ram Chander Sabharwal v. Krishan chand Sabharwal and others, the deceased had taken inconsistent stand that the deceased together with his four sons was carrying on business in partnership with effect from 1. 4. 82, which partnership took over the erstwhile propriety business of M/s Lok Seva Store. The will further states that Laxman Chander Sabharwal had also separated from the testator in the year 1968. The Will states that the testator was the sole owner of the business under the name and style of M/s Lok Seva store. This stand is contrary tot he stand set up in the above said suit. The Will depicts that it was executed by the testator on 6. 11. 90 in presence of two witnesses. However, the attesting witnesses have put the date under their signatures as 7. 11. 90. The Will purports to have been registered on 8. 11. 90 at the residence of the testator. The testator for the last 1/1. 1/2 decades never resided at the premises No. 129-130, Vasdev nagar, Pratap Nagar, Delhi and lived with one Ms. Kiran Dev at 56, Vasdev nagar, Pratap Nagar. A suit had been filed by one M/s Fargo Mentles of Bombay against the testator wherein the deceased was shown as resident of 56, Vas