- (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS second appeal was earlier allowed by this Court (by Hon'ble O. P. Jain, J. since retired) on 22. 5. 1997. Thereafter, review was filed, which was dismissed on 4. 9. 1998 by the same Hon'ble Judge. Thereafter, matter was carried to the Supreme Court in the form of Civil Appeals No. 7373 and 7374 of 2000. On 12. 4. 2007, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court on the ground that substantial questions of law had not been framed before hearing and allowing the second appeal and the matter was remanded to the high Court for re-hearing of the appeal after framing Substantial Questions of law.
(3.) AFTER remand from the Supreme Court, three substantial questions of law were framed in this appeal on 18. 7. 2007, which are quoted below: "1. Whether the lower Appellate Court is justified in decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for cancellation of registered "will", the power of attorney as well as sale deed in absence of legal heirs of the plaintiffs respondents, i. e. Viswanath Tiwari for whom the Trial Court's decree has become final and their interest are inseparable? 2. Whether the decree passed by the lower Appellate Court is inconsistent in view of the fact that the joint decree passed by the Trial Court has become final for the heirs of Viswanath Tiwari (deceased), plaintiff-respondent on the ground of the abatement of appeal/suit in respect of Viswanath Tiwari? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the lower appellate Court has misunderstood the scope of section 68 of Indian Evidence Act?";