A will is genuine and validly executed if it is shown that the testator had a cordial relationship with the beneficiary, had special love and affection towards the beneficiary, and had gifted property to the beneficiary during the testator's lifetime.

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

1. The dispute in the above captioned appeal is between the family members/legal heirs of Late Smt. Krishna Devi Ahuja (hereinafter referred to as the testatrix).

2. The genealogy tree of the family of Late Smt.Krishna Devi Ahuja is as under:

Krishna Devi Ahuja (Testatrix) I I

------------------------------------------------

I I I

Krishan Kumar Ahuja(Son, non-objector) Ashok Kumar Ahuja(Son, objector) Usha Bajaj(Daughter)I

----------------

I I

Anil Bajaj (Son) Ameeta Bajaj(Daughter)

3. Testatrix left the world of the living on 22.07.1982. Her husband had predeceased her, having died somewhere in the year 1967 or 1968.

4. On 21.09.1987, Smt. Usha Bajaj (hereinafter referred to as the propounder) filed a petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 seeking probate of a will dated 02.11.1977 purportedly executed by the testatrix. Inter alia, to establish that the will was validly executed by the testatrix attention of the court was drawn to the contemporaneous conduct of the testatrix vis-a-vis the contents of the will. It was pleaded that during her lifetime the testatrix had already implemented a substantial part of the bequest by transferring to the named beneficiaries what was intended to be transferred after her death. It was pleaded that the property at Bombay which was bequeathed in favor of the propounder was transferred by the testatrix during her lifetime in name of the propounder. Likewise, in her lifetime the testatrix gifted the gold ornaments which were bequeathed in favor of the daughter of the propounder Ms. Ameeta Bajaj to her.

5. Ashok Kumar Ahuja the son of the testatrix filed objections to the will. The will was challenged on the ground that it was a forged and a fabricated document created by the propounder and her husband Dr. K.C. Bajaj by either one of the following three methods namely, (i) signatures of the testatrix on the will were forged; (ii) signatures of the testatrix were obtained on the will without her knowledge or consent; (iii) signatures of the testatrix on the will were obtained by exercising undue influence upon her.

6. Additionally it was pleaded that a will dated 28.09.1968 was the last legal and valid testament of the testatrix. That between the years 1967 to 1982 (the period between the death of the husband of the testatrix till her death) the testatrix mostly resided with the objector and occasionally used to visit the propounder and that on one such occasional visit the propounder and her husband took advantage of the ill-health of the testatrix and without her knowledge or consent or by exercising undue influence upon her obtained her signatures on the will. It was pleaded that will being a forged and fabricated document is strengthened by the fact that the so-called attesting witnesses to the will were colleagues of the husband of the propounder and were not known to the testatrix. That the testatrix never preferred to stay with the propounder even for a single day for the reason she was suspicious of the husband of the propounder who was a shrewd and money-minded person.

7. Regarding the pleadings of contemporaneous conduct of the testatrix, it was denied that the property in Bombay was transferred by the testatrix in name of the propounder. It was pleaded that the husband of the propounder Dr. K.C. Bajaj who was a government employee was the owner of the property at Bombay. It was pleaded that to avoid vacating the government accommodation Dr. K.C. Bajaj transferred the said property in name of the testatrix without her knowledge or consent. That when the testatrix had no knowledge about the transfer of the property in her name, then how could she transfer the same in name of the propounder. However it was admitted that the testatrix had during her life time gifted her gold ornaments to the daughter of the propounder Ms. Ameeta Bajaj.

8. The will in question, which is penned in English language on 2 sheets of paper, is an unregistered doc