D.N. Upadhyay, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the Judgment dated 22.06.2006 passed by Additional Judicial Commissioner No. VI, Ranchi in connection with Probate Title Suit No. 05/2004 arising out of Probate Case No. 57/1997 whereby the Suit brought by the appellants for grant of Letter of Administration against a Will dated 09.11.1983 executed by Kamal Sahu, grand father of the appellants has been dismissed.

2. The case of the appellants in brief is that Kamal Sahu, son of Late Sita Sao, resident of village – Hesalong, P.S. Khelari, District – Ranchi, the grand father of the appellants, executed his last Will dated 09.11.1983 and bequeath the Schedule property in favour of the appellants. Kamal Sahu died on 30.10.1993 leaving behind six (6) sons and two (2) married daughters who have been arrayed as opposite party nos. 1 to 8 in the Original Application. The wife of Kamal Sahu predeceased him on 15.12.1980. The Will executed by Kamal Sahu was attested by two (2) witnesses namely Ram Kumar Sahu and Heerakant Jha and scribe of the Will was Laxman Singh. The schedule properties mentioned in the Will for grant of Letter of Administration has been valued at Rs.45,000/-.

3. The opposite parties, after receipt of notice appeared before the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner. The opposite party no. 1 – Rameshwar Sahu and opposite parties no. 4 to 6 – Krishna Sahu, Kishori Sahu and Parmanand Sahu have filed their separate written statement. The opposite party no. 2 – Nageshwar Sahu, opposite party no. 7 – Smt. Shavitry Devi and opposite party no. 8 – Smt. Sunita Devi did not file their written statement but supported the case of the appellants by filing petition through their lawyers. Since opposite parties no. 1 and 4 to 6 have raised objections against grant of Probate in favour of appellants, learned Trial Court referred the matter to Judicial Commissioner for registering Title Suit vide Order dated 14.01.2004. Accordingly, the application for grant of Probate filed by the appellants was converted into Title Suit No. 05/2004.

4. Learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, after securing attendance of the parties and completion of their pleadings, framed following issues:-

(1) Whether the probate case is maintainable?

(2) Whether Late Kamal Sahu executed a genuine and valid will as the last testament dt. 09.11.83 in favour of the plaintiffs?

(3) Whether the will as last testament of Late Kamal Sahu was executed voluntarily without coercion, fraud and undue influence?

(4) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief as claimed for?

5. The appellants examined altogether five (5) witnesses and proved documents as per exhibits list in support of their claim and contention.

On the other hand, the respondents/opposite parties had also examined witnesses to prove their averment in their pleadings.

Opposite party nos. 1 and 2 had examined themselves as a witnesses whereas four witnesses have been examined on behalf of opposite party nos. 4, 5 and 6.

Ram Kumar Sahu (A.W.-1) is an attesting witness to the Will executed by Kamal Sahu. He has stated that Kamal Sahu had executed his Will in favour of Balram Sahu, Ashok Sahu and Manoj Sahu (appellants) in presence of this witness and Heerakant Jha and the Will was written by Laxman Singh. The Testator had put his LTI on the said Will in presence of this witness and Heerakant Jha. He has proved this signature and the signature of Heerakant Jha appearing on the Will as Exhibits-1 and 1/1. He has further stated that the Will was written by Laxman Singh who also signed it and the Will has been proved and marked Exhibit-2. The property for which Will was executed has further been described by this witness. He has stated that the property against which Will was executed was the self acquired property of Kamal Sahu. At the time of execution of Will, the Testator was maintaining sound health. In para-5 he says that Kamal Sahu, on being satisfied with the services being rendered to