1. Present is an appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act?) against the impugned judgment dated 04.01.2010 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Delhi whereby the petition of respondent no. 1 herein i.e. Wanti Devi for grant of probate has been allowed.

2. The appellant and the respondents herein are real brothers and sisters being the sons and daughters of late Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary. The respondent no. 1 herein i.e. petitioner before the learned trial court had filed a petition under Section 276 of the Act seeking probate of the will dated 19.07.1991 allegedly executed by her father late Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary i.e. testator whereby he had bequeathed property No. H-34 A in her favour. In the said petition, she had averred that her father i.e. late Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary had executed the aforesaid will in sound disposing mind, out of his own free will in the presence of two independent witnesses and it was his last will. The appellant as well as respondents 2 to 6 had filed objections opposing the grant of probate on the ground that said Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary never executed any such will and if any such will was there, the same was false, manipulated and fabricated one. It was further alleged that no property was bequeathed in the alleged will dated 19.07.1991 by the testator in favour of his wife as such will in question was not believable.

3. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:- “1. Whether the Will dated 19.7.1991 propounded by the petitioner is the last genuine will of Late Sh. Asa Nand Chaudhary and if so, was it validly executed by him in sound disposing mind? OPP 2. Relief.”

4. In order to prove her case, the respondent no. 1 herein i.e. the petitioner before the trial court had examined herself as PW1. She had also examined R.K. Grover PW6 and P.L. Mehndiratta PW7 the attesting witnesses to the will in question. The other witnesses produced by her are Ms. Reena PW3, Sh. Inder Raj Singh, PW-5 from the office of sub-Registrar, New Delhi.

5. Appellant herein was respondent no. 6 before the court of learned Addl. District Judge, Delhi. On behalf of appellant and respondents 2 to 6 i.e. objectors, only Ramswaroop Choudhary i.e. respondent no. 6 herein had appeared as a witness as RW1.

6. Before the learned Addl. District Judge, it was argued that Sh. Asa Nand Choudhary i.e. testator had executed a valid will on 19.07.1991 in sound disposing mind. It was contended that from the evidence on record the due execution and attestation of the will as per the requirement of law has been proved. On behalf of the appellant and other objectors i.e. respondent no. 2 to 6, it was argued that probate petition was filed with ulterior motive to deprive other legal heirs of their rightful share in property in question. It was contended that the testator was suffering from various ailments at the time of execution of the alleged will. He was bed ridden for the last many years and was unable to move. It was also contended that he was mentally imbalanced person due to advance age and ailment and was not in a position to make a will. It was also argued that the will was apparently a forged document as nothing was bequeathed in favour of the wife of the testator. There are other legal heirs of the deceased i.e. appellant and respondents 2 to 6 and no reason was given in the will in question as to why the property was bequeathed only in favour of appellant in exclusion of other legal heirs.

7. Relying on the evidence and relevant case law relied upon by the parties, the learned Addl. District Judge has held that the respondent no. 1 herein i.e. petitioner before the said court was able to prove that the will dated 19.07.1991 was genuine will of the testator and the same was executed by him in sound disposing mind and accordingly allowed the petition and ordered that the aforesaid will be probated in her favour on her furnishing valuation report,