High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
Kartar Singh & Anr. v. Surjit Kaur & Anr. - RSA-767-1996  RD-P&H 12842 (18 December 2006)
R.S.A. No. 767 of 1996
Date of Decision: 6.12.2006
Kartar Singh and another.
Surjit Kaur and another.
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahesh Grover
Present:Shri G.S.Jaswal, Advocate for the appellants.
Shri K.S.Cheema, Advocate for the respondents.
The present appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against judgments and decrees dated 10.8.1988 and 8.1.1991 passed by Sub Judge Ist Class, Dasuya (hereinafter referred to as `the trial Court') and the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter described as `the lower Appellate Court'), respectively.
The appellants have assailed the impugned judgments on the issue of validity of the Will which has been discarded by the trial Court as well as by the lower Appellate Court.
Mehnga Singh, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants and the respondents, is alleged to have executed a Will dated 26.6.1985 barely R.S.A.No.767 of 1991
ten days before his death. The Will, though registered, did not find favour with the trial Court and the lower Appellate Court, since Mehnga Singh was given to signing his documents and not thumb marking them which was the case in the Will. The last document in the shape of a bank receipt was signed by Mehnga Singh on 31.5.1985 (Exhibit DW5/B). No cogent explanation could be given as to why the executor of the Will had deviated from his practice of signing the documents in preference to thumb marking.
Besides, there is overwhelming evidence on record to show that Mehnga Singh was living with respondent no.1-Surjit Kaur, his daughter.
This is fortified from the fact that all the relevant documents pertaining to disbursement of his pension and bank transactions etc. were produced in evidence by respondent no.1- Surjit Kaur. Both the Courts below have found that the Will is shrouded by suspicious circumstances and no worthwhile evidence has been shown which could persuade this Court to take a contrary view.
The validity of the Will has always to be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case. The factum of the testator signing his documents barely few days prior to his death shows that there is no justifiable reason for adopting a different course of thumb marking the Will.
That apart, the Will does not reveal that the testator was unwell as he died ten days after the execution thereof. Moreover, he was staying with his daughter which is reflective of the attitude of the appellants the beneficiaries, towards the testator. No justifiable reasons have been given in the Will to exclude the other heirs from the list of beneficiaries in the Will.
The cumulative effect of all these factors leads to an irresistible conclusion of the Will being surrounded by suspicious circumstances, warranting no R.S.A.No.767 of 1991
interference with the findings recorded in the impugned judgments.
Besides, no question of law arises in the present appeal even though the same have been framed by the learned counsel for the appellants.
For the reasons stated above, the appeal is devoid of any merit and is dismissed as such.
December 06,2006 (Mahesh Grover )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.