Ishan Chandra Das, J. - (1.) Claiming herself to be an aggrieved by the judgment and order of granting probate of the Will dated 30.06.1983, executed by one Usha Ranjan Das, the appellant herein, being one of the off springs (daughter) of the said testator, is assailing such judgment and order passed by learned Additional District Judge, 4th Court at Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Misc Case No. 511 of 1997 (Original Suit No. 34 of 1999).
(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the instant case, as stated in the application of such proceeding is that one Usha Ranjan Das who died on 21.01.1994, executed a Will on 30.06.1983 bequeathing his property as per schedule of the Will and the respondents no. 1, 2 & 3 along with the appellant were appointed as executors of the said Will. It was further stated in the said application that the testator of the Will(i.e. Usha Ranjan Das)was a Hindu by religion and he passed away leaving two sons, Arabinda Das(respondent no.1)of the probate proceeding, Ardhendu Das, the petitioner therein, three daughters Mandira Deb, Ashima Naha @ Das & Indira Sarkar. Ashima, the appellant herein (being the defendant no. 3 of the probate proceeding & hereinafter referred to as the appellant) was a legatee co-executor under the Will. In the said application, it was stated that as per the Will, the petitioner of the original probate proceeding was asked by the testator to provide her with 5 cottahs of land with suitable constructions thereon, subject to condition that if the appellant would get her marriage with the approval of the other executors, otherwise she would be debarred from the privilege of such Will, as it was done in case of Indira Sarkar, the defendant no. 4 of the original probate proceeding.
(3.) Mandira, the defendant no. 2 of the original proceeding, as it is referred to in the impugned judgment did not raise any objection against the probate proceeding and the defendant no. 4 though filed a written statement but ultimately did not turn up to contest the same. The appellant herein being the defendant no. 3 of the original proceeding in her written statement questioned the maintainability of the same on certain legal infirmities like tampering of the Will, manipulation of the same etc. Denying proper execution of the Will, the appellant being the sole contesting defendant further stated that the attestation of such Will of the testator was not proper in terms of the relevant provisions of the Indian Succession Act rather she contended that though the Will was registered one but the execution of such Will was not a free Will of testator rather the same was managed by the profounder of the Will with an ill motive to frustrate the interest of the other successors in interest, taking advantage of old age ailments and simplicity of the testator.;