The court affirmed that the burden of proof lies with the claimant to establish the validity of a Will, which was not met by the appellant in this case.

JUDGMENT

Sudeepti Sharma, J. (Oral)

The appellant filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is the owner in possession of the land measuring 40 Kanal 10 Marla being ½ th share out of the land measuring 81 Kanal comprised of Khewat No. 351/337 Khatauni No. 918 Rect. No. 28 Killa No. 5 (8-0) 12/2 (7-0) 17(8- 0) 18/1(5-4), Khatauni No.919, Rect. No. 28 Killa No. 3/2 (4-12) 4(8-0) Khatauni No. 920 Rect No. 20 Killa No. 7(8-0) 8(8-0) 9(76-19), 10/1(0-5) 14(8-0) Khatauni No.921 Rect. No.28 Killa No.13 (8-0) situated at village Toot, Tehsil and District Ferozepur on the basis of Will dated 12.10.1984 exeucted by Bhagwan Kaur widow of Ganga Singh.

2. In the suit, the appellant alleged that the suit land measuring 81 Kanal as detailed in the head note of the plaint was owned by one Bhagwan Kaur widow of Ganga Singh. Bhagwan Kaur had been residing with the appellant and the appellant is the real nephew of Bhagwan Kaur. The said Bhagwan Kaur has since expired and the appellant during her life time had been serving Bhagwan Kaur and she has got great love and affection towards the appellant due to the services rendered by the appellant to Bhagwan Kaur during her life time. She executed legal, valid and genuine Will in her sound disposing mind and on her own free will in favour of the appellant on 12.10.1984. Earlier Bhagwan Kaur was the owner in possession of the land in dispute and after her death, the appellant became owner in possession of the land measuring 40 Kanal 10 Marla being 1/2th share out of total land measuring 81 Kanal on the basis of Will dated 12.10.1984.

3. Upon notice, the respondents appeared and submitted that the appellant is neither related with Bhagwan Kaur the previous owner of the suit land nor he ever resided with said Bhagwan Kaur. Bhagwan Kaur never executed any will dated 12.10.1984 in favour of the appellant and alleged Will is a forged and fabricated document. The appellant never remained in actual cultivating possession of the land in dispute at the spot. It was further submitted that respondent No.1 Jagir Singh is the adopted son of Bhagwan Kaur. The respondent was given in adoption by the parents of the respondent to Ganga Singh and Bhagwan Kaur who took the respondent in adoption from Sohan Singh and his wife in ceremony. Respondent No.1 Jagir Singh had been looking after Bhagwan Kaur during her life time and had been treating her as his mother and Bhagwan Kaur out of love and affection and services rendered by the respondent, executed the valid Will on 01.11.1984 in favour of the respondent in her sound disposing mind. After the death of Bhagwan Kaur, the mutation of inheritance of Bhagwan Kaur bearing No.4746 of village Toot, Tehsil and District Ferozepur was ordered to be sanctioned on 27.12.2000 by the Court of the learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Ferozepur. During life time Bhagwan Kaur had been cultivating the land in dispute and after her death, the respondent remained in actual cultivating possession thereof. The mutation of inheritance was rightly sanctioned by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Ferozepur in favour of respondent and the respondent became absolute owner in possession of the land in dispute at the spot. Respondent No.1 through his attorney Jagir Singh son of Sadiq son of Hakam vide sale deed dated 18.01.2001 transferred the land measuring 20 Kanal 5 Marla out of the land in dispute in favour of Bachittar Singh son of Joginder Singh, resident of village Rukna Begu and also executed sale deed through his attorney in favour of Sucha Singh son of Joginder Singh for valuable consideration. The possession of the land was delivered by the respondent in favour of Bachittar Singh (respondent No.2) and Sucha Singh (respondent No.3) the date when the sale deeds were executed and said Bachittar Singh and Sucha Singh are in actual cultivating possession of the land purchased by them. The present suit was barred by limitation. On merits, it was submitted that Bhagwan Kaur was co-sha