A.S.CHANDURKAR,J. - (1.) Since both these appeals arise out of the judgment of the first appellate Court in Regular Civil Appeal No.110/2007 they are being decided by this common judgment.
(2.) The appellants in both the appeals are the original plaintiffs. It is their case that one Shripat Punawatkar had three sons namely Manohar, Srirang and Pruthviraj. The plaintiff no.1 claims to be the second wife of said Pruthviraj and plaintiff nos. 2 and 3 are the issues from said marriage. According to the plaintiffs, said Pruthviraj had earlier married one Smt. Champa who expired on 12.4.1999. The defendant Nos.2(A) and 2(B) were the issues from that marriage. It is the case of the plaintiffs that Shripat was not in sound health prior to his death. The defendant no.1 - Srirang had got executed a will from Shripat on 16.7.1997. By the said will the suit property was bequeathed in favour of the defendants by excluding the plaintiffs. As the defendants sought to mutate their names in the mutation records, the plaintiffs on 20.7.2002 filed suit for declaration that the said will dated 16.7.1997 was null and void with a further declaration that the defendants were not owners of the suit property.
(3.) In the written statement filed by the defendant no.1 it was pleaded that the property in question was the self acquired property of Shripat and he had executed a will dated 16.7.1997 when he was in sound health. The defendant no.3 also filed his written statement and took the stand that the defendant no.1 had taken undue advantage of the ill health of Shripat for having the will executed.;