By the Court.—Property often disrupts family peace and leads to feuds in a family: it creates differences that are difficult to bridge. This case is an example of the same, where brothers are fighting over a will for a residential house. And in resolving the dispute, we visit the principles applicable in determining the genuineness of the will.

THE FACTS

2. Sri Netra Pandey (Sri Pandey) was a teacher of history in Prayag Mahila Vidya Peeth, Allahabad. He was a writer and have written text books of history for school children. He married twice. By his first wife Smt. Chhabirani, he had one son; by the second wife Smt. Bhagwati Devi, (Smt. Bhagwati), he had five sons and six daughters.

3. The relevant pedigree omitting the six daughters is as follows:

4. It is said that Sri Pandey and Smt. Bhagwati jointly executed a registered will on 20.12.1988 (the 1988 will). It is said to be hand written by Smt. Bhagwati. By this will, both of them gave their movable and immovable property to the surviving spouse and after death of the surviving spouse, to their youngest son, Sri Dinesh Chandra Pandey (the Defendant-Appellant).

5. Sri Pandey died on 10.1.1993. Smt. Bhagwati fell ill and was diagnosed to be suffering from cancer of the stomach on 10.5.1993.

6. Subsequently, a civil suit no. 345 of 1993 was filed on 25.5.1993. In this suit, the Defendant-Appellant, his wife, their son, and Smt. Bhagwati are the plaintiffs. The relief sought is that the other brothers of the Defendant-Appellant be restrained from interfering with their possession from residential house at 21, Church Lane, Allahabad (the House).

7. Smt. Bhagwati is said to have executed a second Will on 14.6.1993 (the 1993 will). The relevant facts in respect of this will are as follows:

The 1993 will deals with only one property namely the House. By this will, the House was bequeathed to the five sons of Smt. Bhagwati. However, it was also mentioned that the Defendant-Appellant would be entitled to live in the first floor and in case the House is sold then his two sons will be given Rs. 50,000/- each from the sale consideration;

It was presented for registration by Sri Awadhesh Chandra Pandey, one of the beneficiaries under the 1993 will. However, its registration was refused by Sub-Registrar on 20.7.1993;

Sri Awadhesh Chandra Pandey filed an appeal against the same. It was allowed by the District Registrar on 21.5.1994 and Sub-Registrar was required to register it. Thereafter, the 1993 will was registered on 25.5.1994;

During registration proceeding, the 1993 will was supported by four daughters of Smt. Bhagwati. However, one daughter had not expressed any opinion in these proceeding. Later on, she filed writ petition no. 19327 of 1994 against the order of the District Registrar. It was dismissed on 23.6.1994;

The Defendant-Appellant also filed writ petition no. 27399 of 1994 against the order of the District Registrar. It was also dismissed on 27.11.1993.

8. After death of Smt. Bhagwati, a family settlement was allegedly entered among her five sons on 27.6.1993. By the settlement, it was decided to sell the House and proceeds were to be distributed equally amongst them.

9. The Defendant-Appellant filed Testamentary case no. 38 of 1998 for grant of letters of administration in respect of the 1988 will. It was contested by Brijesh Chandra Pandey, Suresh Chandra Pandey, and Awadhesh Chandra Pandey (the Plaintiff-Respondents) and was converted into Testamentary suit (TS) no. 12 of 1999.

10. The plaintiff-respondents filed Testamentary case no. 16 of 1999 for grant of probate or letters of administration of the 1993 will. It was contested by Defendant-Appellant and was converted as Testamentary suit (TS) no. 13 of 1999.

11. The aforementioned two suits were consolidated. Out of these two, TS 13 of 1999 was treated to be leading case and evidence was led in this suit.

12. Among others, the Plaintiff-Respondents filed the following documents:

(i) Original Will dated 14.6.19