CR No.1031 of 2015

#1#

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CR No.1031 of 2015

Date of Decision:-16.02.2015

Gurbachan Singh.

......Petitioner.

Versus

Santo & Ors.

......Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:-

Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate for the Petitioner.

***

JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL)

The suit property being agricultural land measuring 26 Kanals

13 Marlas and a residential house and one motor connection was earlier

owned by Waryam Singh son of Hira Singh son of Fauja Singh resident of

village Manawan, District Moga. After his death the mutation on the basis

of inheritance was entered in the name of his widow Gurnam Kaur. The

step sister of Waryam Singh namely Santo and her son Arjun Singh filed a

suit seeking 2/3^rd share in the property left behind by Waryam Singh on the

basis of Will dated 2.7.2003 by impleading Gurnam Kaur as the sole

defendant. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff vide judgment

and decree dated 1.9.2011. The said Gurnam Kaur, who was awarded only

1/3^rd share filed an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 1.9.2011

and during the pendency of her appeal she is stated to have died on

11.12.2013. Since she had died issueless, three separate applications for

being impleaded as Lrs of Gurnam Kaur were filed . The applications filed

by plaintiff no.1 Santo and the one filed by the petitioner/Gurbachan Singh

were dismissed vide impugned order dated 5.1.2015 passed by the learned

Civil Judge(Jr. Divn.), Moga while allowing the application of one Chanan

VINAY MAHAJAN

2015.02.16 17:31

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

at Chandigarh

CR No.1031 of 2015

#2#

Singh on the basis of unregistered Will dated 9.12.2013.

Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is

not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

It is not in dispute that the said Gurnam Kaur had died issueless

and the petitioner-Gurbachan Singh claimed her to be Nephew had set up a

unregistered Will dated 9.6.2013 for being her sole legal heir, whereas

Chanan Singh had propounded another unregistered Will dated 9.12.2013.

The petitioner/applicant has miserably failed to prove the Will propounded

by him, in fact could not even produce the original Will dated 9.6.2013. In

such circumstances, the findings recorded by the trial Court against the

petitioner/applicant are found to be absolutely correct. A regards the claim

of Chanan Singh, who is stated to be unrelated to Gurnam Kaur, the learned

trial Court has found that in the light of evidence of the Scribe Bhagwan

Singh (RW-2) and the attesting witness Sham Singh (RW-1) along with the

evidence of Finger Print Expert as RW-3 regarding the thumb impression of

the testator Gurnam Kaur, held Will to be duly proved while also noticing

that the applicant had dispelled any suspicious circumstances surrounding

the Will. Thus, on the conclusive basis on the evidence produced, the

findings recorded by the learned trial Court in favour of Chanan Singh

cannot be held to be arbitrary much less perverse.

In view of the above, finding no merit in the present revision

petition, the same is hereby dismissed.

( JASWANT SINGH )

JUDGE

February 16, 2015

Vinay

VINAY MAHAJAN

2015.02.16 17:31

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

at Chandigarh