The judgment emphasizes the elements of undue influence and the burden of proof on the plaintiff to establish it, as well as the defendant's obligation to prove the validity of the will in his favor.

JUDGMENT :

1. This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.01.2001, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan, Camp Court at Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in Civil Appeal No. 97-NL/13 of 1999.

2. Material facts necessary for adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal, are that the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents, Gita Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff' for convenience sake) had instituted a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent prohibitory injunction and in the alternative for maintenance. According to the plaintiff, his wife had left him about 40 years' ago and thereafter her whereabouts were not known. He had no issues and had been living alone. His brother took advantage of his solitary condition and started visiting his village and showing sympathy towards him. One day, he got will of property of the plaintiff in the names of his sons, S/Shri Dina Nath, Gian Chand and Teerath Ram. Plaintiff objected to the same. The plaintiff never knew and never executed any will in favour of the sons of the defendant. The defendant apprised the plaintiff that he had made will of his property in favour of his brother's sons, namely, S/Shri Prem Singh, Jai Singh and Hans Ram. Plaintiff told the defendant that his cousin got his thumb impression on some papers relating to permission for cutting of Khair trees from the land which he owned jointly with his brother. The defendant told the plaintiff to accompany him to Ramshehar on 28.02.1994 if he wanted to get the will revoked in case he was not interested in bequeathing his property in favour of his brother's sons. He contacted in the evening his brothers and his sons, who confirmed that they have got the will of entire property in their favour. The plaintiff believed the defendant and after reposing faith in him, he accompanied him to Ramshehar for getting the will revoked. In the evening, he was suffering from fever and next day, the defendant took him to Ramshehar with the help of his sons and provided him pills and asked him to sit with the petition writer who was to scribe the revocation deed and thereafter he brought Sh. Datta Ram and Ram Lok there. The scribe and S/Shri Datta Ram and Ram Lok assured him that he was executing a revocation deed and obtained his thumb impression on certain papers and thereafter when he visited the office of Sub-Registrar, he did not ask him anything and was made to sign more papers by the registration Clerk. Next day, the defendant came to his village and apprised the plaintiff that he had gifted the entire land in his favour, therefore, both of them should live together under the same roof. According to the plaintiff, the defendant was closely related to him and he has taken undue advantage of the relationship subsisting between them and dominated his will to execute a gift deed which he never wanted to do. Therefore, the gift deed dated 28.02.1994 alleged to have been executed by him in favour of the defendant was wrong, illegal, unconsciousable and was liable to be set aside.

3. The defendant contested the suit. On merits, he pleaded that the plaintiff had executed a gift deed dated 28.02.1994 in his favour voluntarily and out of his free will in sound and disposing state of mind. According to him, the plaintiff had earlier executed a Will dated 08.06.1981 in favour of sons of his brother Shri Ram Saran, which was revoked by him on 24.04.1990 when they stopped serving him. Thereafter, the plaintiff approached the defendant, who is his close relative to look after him and his property and the defendant accordingly asked his sons to look after the plaintiff. He had been also looking after him. Thereafter, the plaintiff firstly executed will dated 12.06.1991 in favour of the sons of the defendant which was registered with Sub-Registrar Ramshehar and thereafter, out of love and affection, he got gift deed executed in his favour on 28.02.1994.

4. The plai