S.P.GARG, J.

1. Present petition under Sections 276 and 278 read with Sections 218 and 237 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) has been filed by the petitioners – Anil Prakash and Sunil Prakash for grant of Probate/Letters of Administration.

2. Briefly stated, the petitioners’ case is that deceased Dr.Satya Prakash, a male Hindu, died at Sahi Hospital on 02.02.2001. Upon his death, the deceased left behind his wife Usha Kiran (since expired on 25.11.2002), Anil Prakash (petitioner No.1) -son, Sunil Prakash (petitioner No.2) -son and Rita Gulati (daughter) -respondent No.2. During his life time, the deceased executed various Wills, including the one dated 17.07.2000 being his last Will. The Will in question was duly attested by two attesting witnesses -Anil Bhalla and Praveen Vashist, Advocate. The Will after its execution was handed over to Dr.Dharam Pal, his brother. On 18.05.2004, the petitioners were informed about the Will in question. The respondent No.2 was contacted on 08.06.2004 and apprised about the Will in question and the earlier Wills. It is averred that the deceased bequeathed his half share in the property No.18-A, Nizamuddin West (hereinafter ‘the suit property’) in favour of the petitioners.

3. The petition was contested by Rita Gulati (since expired); her legal heirs – Desh Deepak Gulati, Rachna Gulati, Kalpana Gulati and Vandana Gulati (R-2A to R-2D) have been brought on record. In her objections, Rita Gulati averred that the petitioners had not come with clean hands and the Will in question was obtained by them by fraud, coercion and undue influence to deprive her of her valid claim in the suit property. The Will was propounded to illegally usurp the entire estate of her father in which she had a share. The deceased had executed his last legal Will in December, 1996; registered on 29.01.1997. As per her parents’ wishes, she along with her family had lived in the suit property from August, 1996 to 13.07.2000. Her parents were very old and had become frail and weak; they needed petitioners’ company. However, they never took care of them; petitioner No.1 is a permanent resident of U.K. and the petitioner No.2 was away to Nagda due to his employment there. During her stay with the deceased, she used to take care of her parents. In the evening of 13.07.2000, both the petitioners ransacked the house and their personal belongings and she along with her family members was forced to vacate the suit property where she lived for the last around 47 months. It is further averred that the Will in question was not executed by the deceased out of his own free will, choice and freedom. From perusal of the earlier Wills, it is clear that the deceased while executing a new Will invariably used to supersede his previous Wills by specifically referring to the earlier Will. The alleged Will is quite unlike the earlier ones and has been got executed without application of mind and in a desperate hurry. The petitioners did not disclose as to how deceased’s brother Dr.Dharam Pal came into possession of the Will and why it was kept secretly for more than three years after his death. It is alleged that the petitioners after throwing her out of the suit property on 13.07.2000 took full control of the family house and the belongings and forced the testator to put his signatures on the Will. The petitioners continued to maintain solemn silence regarding the Will till the death of testator’s wife and for 18 months thereafter.

4. It is further averred that attesting witness Anil Bhalla is petitioner No.1’s friend and is a self-employed Chartered Accountant; he is his college-friend and his office is currently located on the second floor. The testator had never reposed confidence in Anil Bhalla; he is an interested party and used to stay with petitioner No.1 during his visits to U.K. The other attesting witness Praveen Vashist is an unknown entity. PW-Anil Bhalla and the petitioners do not know him. It has not been