The court validated a Will executed in sound state of mind, emphasizing that allegations of illegitimacy were unproven, affirming statutory compliance in its execution.

JUDGMENT :

VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J .

1. The appellant has preferred this Regular Second Appeal (here- in-after referred to as “RSA”), challenging the judgment and decree of the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Zira. In the course of the appeal, the learned First Appellate Court reversed the findings and decree of the trial Court, thereby setting aside the decision rendered by the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Zira.

2. Succinctly stated, the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, claiming ownership of the suit land on the basis of a Will executed by his brother, Didar Singh @ Dara Singh, on 16.09.1985. The plaintiff contended that the appellant/defendant, Kesar Kaur, is not the legally wedded wife of Didar Singh and, therefore, has no right to inherit from him. He further asserted that the mutation of inheritance in her favor is illegal, null, and void.

2.1. The appellant-defendant contested the suit, alleging that the Will relied upon by the plaintiff is forged and fabricated. She claimed that she is the legally wedded wife of Didar Singh, asserting that the Karewa ceremony was performed between her and Didar Singh.

3. Upon a careful examination of the pleadings of the parties, the Court framed the following issues for determination, with a view to effectively adjudicating the rival contentions raised by the parties:-

1. Whether Didar Singh executed a Valid Will dated 16.09.1985 in favour of the plaintiff? OPP.

2. Whether Kesar Kaur defendant was married to Didar Singh? OPD.

2-A Whether the defendant No.1 was never married with Puran Singh? OPD.

3. If issue No.2 is proved whether marriage of Kesar Kaur with Didar Singh was illegal and invalid during life time of her previous husband?

3-A Whether Kesar Kaur was previously married with one Puran Singh? If so its effect? OPP

(Objected to and will be decided at the time of arguments

4. Relief

4. Both parties were afforded ample opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their respective claims and defenses. Upon the conclusion of the evidence and after hearing learned counsel for the parties at length, the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, having carefully considered the pleadings, the material on record, and the submissions advanced, dismissed the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff, holding that the Will in question was shrouded in mystery and surrounded by suspicious circumstances. Smt. Kesar Kaur was held to be legally wedded wife of Didar Singh. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the respondent-plaintiff preferred an appeal, which was subsequently allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ferozepur, whereas Will in favour of plaintiff was upheld.

5. Challenging the aforesaid judgment and decree, the appellant preferred the present appeal, which was admitted for hearing. In consequence, notice was duly issued to the respondents, who appeared through learned counsel, and the records of the Courts below were requisitioned for careful and thorough examination and consideration by this Court.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their submissions in the context of the pleadings, evidence on record, and findings of the Courts below. The record has been carefully examined to determine whether any legal infirmity, error, or perversity exists in the impugned judgment and decree warranting interference in this appeal.

7. As regards the scope of second appeal, it is now a settled proposition of law that in Punjab and Haryana, second appeals preferred are to be treated as appeals under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918 and not under Secti