The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for valid execution and proof of a Will, as well as the recognition of the validity of a gift deed despite procedural non-compliance.

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition No. 351 of 1986 and the Regular Second Appeals No. 2385, 2395, 2396, 2401 and 2450 of 1993, which have been ordered to be heard along with aforesaid writ petition.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are beneficiaries of the Will dated 5.9.1962, alleged to have been executed by Smt. Chanan Kaur, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing of the order dated 25.11.1985 (Annexure P-6), passed by the Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab, Chandigarh, vide which the orders dated 18.10.1982 and 19.12.1983, passed by the Collector as well as the Commissioner, respectively, were set aside.

3. The brief facts of the case are that one Smt. Chanan Kaur, widow of Sardar Triloki Nath, was owner of the agricultural land, situated in two villages, namely Mand Miani Jhanduwala and Mand Sardar Sahib Wala, both in Tehsil and District Kapurthala, which is subject matter of the present controversy. She died issueless on 23.11.1962. Consequent upon her death, the question regarding inheritance of her aforesaid land arose, for which two claims were made. One claim was made by the petitioners on the basis of an unregistered Will dated 5.9.1962, alleged to had been executed by Smt. Chanan Kaur and the second claim was made by the Punjab Bhudan Board on the basis of a gift deed dated 26.3.1959, executed by Smt. Chanan Kaur in its favour. Respondents No. 3 to 5, who were cultivators on some part of the land, supported the claim made by the Punjab Bhudan Yagna Board. Initially, two mutations had been sanctioned in favour of the petitioners on 9.4.1981 on the basis of the aforesaid unregistered Will dated 5.9.1962, but the said mutations were contested by the Punjab Bhudan Yagna Board on the ground that Smt. Chanan Kaur had already donated her entire land situated in the aforesaid two villages to it and she never executed the aforesaid alleged will in favour of the petitioners.

4. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade (hereinafter referred to as the AC 1st Grade) invited objections to the aforesaid two mutations sanctioned in favour of the petitioners. Both the parties led their evidence. After considering the evidence led by the parties and hearing the arguments, the AC 1st Grade ground that the alleged Will dated 5.9.1962, relied upon by the petitioners, had not been proved according to law and the same was a forged document. In this regard, he recorded the following findings:

"The said Will saw the light of the day more than 18 years after the death of its executant is in itself a highly suspicious circumstance. I further notice a couple of more discrepancies which support my view that the Will at Ex.A1 is not a genuine document. And, these are; firstly, it is mentioned in the Will that the lands for which the Will was executed are situate in Tehsil Bholath but it is a point of fact that the tehsil Bholath was not in existence during the year 1962 when the Will was allegedly executed and; secondly there is a variation in the statement of A.W.1 who stated that the Sardarni had given a kacha draft of the Will in Hindi to the Typist for typing out the Will in English and the statement made by A.W.2 during cross-examination to the effect that the Sardarni was telling substance of the Will in Punjabi to the Typist who then typed the same in English. These two points too remained unexplained to my satisfaction. Thus in view of this detailed discussion, I am satisfied that the Will dated 5.9.62 at Ex.A1 is a forged docnment and no reliance can be placed thereon."

5. Regarding the gift deed dated 26.3.1959, executed by Smt. Chanan Kaur in favour of Punjab Bhudan Yagna Board, it was held that the said gift deed was duly signed by Smt. Chanan Kaur in presence of a public gathering and that meeting was presided over by Sardar Partap Singh Kairon, the then Chief Minister, Punjab. Even the petitioners did not challenge the genu