IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

FAO No. 82/2007

#

Mr. Suraj Bhan

........

Appellant

!

through:

Mr. Harish K. Mehra, Advocate

VERSUS

$

State & Ors.

........

Respondents

^

through:

Mr. S.M.Chopra, Advocate for

respondents 2 to 4.

RESERVED ON: 7.01.2008

%

DATE OF DECISION:10.01.2008

CORAM:

*

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Pradeep Nandrajog

1.

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed

to see the judgment? Y

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not? Y

3.

Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Y

:

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

1.

This appeal is directed against the order dated

30.11.2006 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi

whereby petition filed by the appellant under Section 276 of the

Indian Succession Act 1925 seeking probate of the will dated

10.12.1992 purported to have been executed by Late Sh. Prabhu

Singh in favour of the appellant was dismissed.

2.

Late Sh. Prabhu Singh (hereinafter referred to as the

deceased) who died on 28.12.1992 was survived by his wife Smt.

FAO No.82/2007

page 1 of 26

2008:DHC:60

Asarfi (respondent No.2), two sons namely Suraj Bhan (appellant),

Jai Bhagwan (respondent No.3) and a married daughter Smt.

Patasso (respondent No.4).

3.

Suraj Bhan i.e. appellant herein filed a petition under

Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 seeking probate of

the will purported to have been executed by the deceased on 10^th

December 1992.

4.

As per the said will the deceased has bequeathed

following movable and immovable properties in favour of Suraj

Bhan to the exclusion of his other legal heirs:-

A

Plot ad measuring 120 square yards and bearing

Municipal No.60, Khasra No.32/6 and 32/7, Village Matiala, New

Delhi.

B

Compensation of one killa which shall be granted in

respect of agricultural land ad measuring 4 bighas and 8 biswas

and situated in Khasra No.57/7, Revenue Estate, Village Matiala,

New Delhi. (It has been mentioned in the will that compensation

of one killa in respect of same agricultural land has already been

received by younger son of the deceased i.e. Jai Bhagwan).

C

Amount lying deposited in the saving account of the

deceased with the Oriental Bank, Naraina.

5.

The will in question Ex. PW-1/1 is a computer typed

document and consists of a single sheet of paper. It has been

FAO No.82/2007

page 2 of 26

2008:DHC:60

typed in the English language. Towards the bottom of the sheet

at the right corner a thumb impression purported to have been

affixed by the deceased is affixed.

6.

The will Ex. PW-1/1 is a notarized and unregistered

document.

7.

The will in question has been witnessed by one Sh.

Man Singh and one Sh. Syed Ahmed.

8.

The other legal heirs of the deceased i.e. his widow

Asarfi, son Jai Bhagwan and daughter Patasso has opposed the

petition for grant of probate.

9.

In the objections to the petition filed by the appellant

respondents has pleaded that the will Ex. PW-1/1 is a forged and

fabricated document. That the deceased never executed a will in

favour of the appellant. That the deceased during his life time

was living under the care and guidance of respondents No. 2 and

3. That the relations between the deceased and appellant were

strained evidenced by the fact that the appellant did not

participate in the last rites of the deceased.

10.

In the reply to the objections filed by the respondents,

appellant denied that during his life time the deceased was living

under the care and guidance of respondents No.2 and 3 or that

the relations between him and deceased was strained. It is

necessary to note following portion of the reply filed by the

FAO No.82/2007

page 3 of 26

2008:DHC:60

appellant:-

“4.

.......It is pertinent to mention here that the

deceased before his death used to live separately

at his own house and the petitioner took best

possible care and provided all the necessary