A. N. Varma, J. - (1.) :-
(2.) THIS petition is directed against an order of the Board of Revenue dated 27-1-1977 allowing a second appeal filed by the contesting respondent no. 3 in respect of a suit filed by the petitioner under section 229-B of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, for a declaration that the petitioner be declared an exclusive bhumidhar of the land in suit. The suit giving rise to this petition was filed by the petitioner on the assertion that one Mansaram was the bnumidhar of the land in suit. He executed a will on 4-6-1965 whereby he bequeathed the property in suit in favour of the petitioner. In the will, he also made a provision that his widow Shrimati Jhunnoo mother of respondent no. 3 should be maintained by the petitioner with the help of one-fourth of the profits from the proudce of the land in dispute. There were certain other provisions made in the will for Shrimati Jhunnoo. It is not necessary to set out the will in detail. Despite that will, Shrimati Jhunnoo got her name entered in the revenue records over the property which stood in the name of Mansaram. Hence the suit: The suit was contested by Shrimati Jhunnoo, who died during the pendency of the suit and is now represented by respondent no. 3, her daughter. In defence, it was asserted that the will set up by the plaintiff was not a genuine document. Mansaram did not execute any will. Shrimati Jhunnoo, as the widow of Mansaram, succeeded to the property left by Mansaram, and her name was, therefore, rightly mutated in the record. She was also in possession over the property as its rightful tenure-holder.
(3.) THE trial court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff had failed to prove that Mansaram had executed any will in his favour. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal which has been allowed. The appellate court upon a very exhaustive consideration of the oral and documentary evidence on the record disagreed with the trial court and held that Mansaram did execute the will in question, and that on the basis of that will, the petitioner was entitled to a declaration sought in the suit. The suit of the petitioner was consequently decreed.;