V.M. Jain, J. :- This order shall dispose of the aforementioned two appeals against the judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby the suit filed by the applicants was dismissed and the cross suit filed by the other side was decreed by the trial Court and the appeals filed by the present appellants were dismissed by the learned District Judge.

2. The facts, which are relevant for the decision of these appeals, are that one suit was filed by the present appellants Smt. Prabhi Devi etc, against the present respondents. It was a suit for declaration and injunction. It was alleged in the said suit that Harnam Singh deceased was the owner in possession of the suit property and that he had expired intestate at Delhi. It was alleged that the defendants were claiming the suit property left by Harnam Singh, on the basis of a false Will dated 1.9.1993 in favour of defendants No. 1 to 3. It was alleged that in fact Harnam Singh deceased had never executed any such Will in favour of defendants No. 1 to 3 and the said Will was not valid and was the result of fraud, coercion, misrepresentation and undue influence. It was alleged that Harnam Singh deceased was ill for the last three years prior to his death and was not in a sound disposing mind to execute any such document. It was alleged that the said Will was not bidding on the plaintiffs and the said Will was the result of connivance between the marginal witnesses, scribe, Sub-Registrar and the defendants. It was further alleged that the suit property was the ancestral coparcenary property in the hands of Harnam Singh deceased and as such Harnam Singh deceased was not competent to execute the Will in question in favour of the defendants qua the coparcenary property. It was accordingly prayed that a decree for declaration be passed declaring the parties to be the joint owners in possession of the suit property, on the basis of natural rule of succession on the death of Harnam Singh deceased and the Will in question be declared illegal and void and the result of fraud etc. It was further alleged that in case the said will was found to be legal and valid, then the plaintiffs were entitled to succeed under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act.

3. The said suit was contested by the defendants by filing written statement taking up various preliminary objections. On merits, it was alleged that during his lifetime Harnam Singh deceased had executed the Will in question dated 1.9.1993 and the same was got registered at Hamirpur. It was denied that Harnam Singh was not of sound mind at the time of the execution of the Will or that the said Will was the result of fraud, undue influence, misrepresentation and coercion. It was alleged that at the time of the execution of the Will, Harnam Singh was in sound disposing mind and was also in good physical health. It was admitted that the suit property was the coparcenary property. However, it was denied that Harnam Singh could not Will away the property in favour of his sons.

4. Aforesaid defendants No. 1 to 3 had also filed a cross-suit for declaration of title and for possession etc. against the aforesaid plaintiffs and proforma defendants, placing reliance on the aforesaid Will dated 1.9.1993, allegedly executed by Harnam Singh in their favour. The said suit was ordered to be consolidated with the earlier suit. Both the suits were disposed of by the learned trial Court, by a single judgment dated 18.6.2003, vide which the earlier suit filed by Smt. Prabhi Devi etc. was dismissed, whereas the consolidated suit filed by Rajesh Kumar etc. was decreed and a decree for declaration was passed, declaring them to be the owners in possession of the suit property, holding that the Will in question was proved to be legal and valid. The appeals filed by Smt. Prabhi Devi etc. were dismissed by the learned District Judge upholding the findings of the trial Court. Aggrieved against the same, Smt. Prabhi Devi etc. filed the above mentioned Regular Second