A.K. Goel, J. - (1.) The respondent -plaintiff filed suit for declaration to the effect that decree dated 26.10. 1974, in suit No.154 of 1974, titled Surjit Singh v/s. Teja Singh passed by Sub Judge, Ajnala, was void and she was in joint possession of the, suit land being the daughter of Teja Singh, deceased. It was stated that deceased Teja Singh bad also executed a valid will dated 9.8.1974 in her favour; defendant No.2 to 5, sons of the brother of Teja Singh deceased, filed suit for declaration that they were owners of the land of Teja Singh deceased since 1962 by way of family arrangement and on account of threats etc, Teja Singh deceased admitted that claim on the basis of which the decree was passed; the plaintiff filed a suit challenging the decree during the life time of Teja Singh, but the said suit was withdrawn with permission to file another suit (on account of technical defect in the earlier suit).
(2.) The defendants contested the suit and denied will in favour of the plaintiff; defendants relied on a will dated 27.11.196S and another will dated 11.6.1975; decree dated 26.10.1974 was also defendant.
(3.) The Trial Court dismissed the suit. It was held that will dated 9.8.1974, Ex.P -1 was not a valid wilt (issue No.1); Teja Singh executed another will dated 11.6.1975, Ex.D -1 (issue No.2); decree dated 26.10.1974 Ex.P -7 suffered by Teja Singh by consent was valid (issue No. 3). The appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court on all the issues and held that will dated 9.8.1974 in favour of the plaintiff was valid; will dated 11.6.1975 in favour of the defendants No.2 to 5 was not valid; decree dated 26.10.1974 was sham and bogus, and was obtained by undue influence and concealment of facts by the defendants and decreed the suit. The appellate Court observed that the suspicious circumstances pointed out by the trial Court regarding will Ex. P -l did not exist; the documents relied on by the defendants were not genuine; will Ex.D -2 dated 27.11.1968 was not discussed since subsequent will Ex.P -1 was up -held; recitals in the order Ex.P -7 based on plaint filed by the defendants were clearly false being contrary to the documents on record like Ex.P -8 jamabandi for the year 1971 -72; the parties treated decree Ex.P -7 as a sham transaction, as the defendants relied on will Ex. D -1 dated 11.6.1975, which was subsequent to the decree and if a valid decree was there, there was no occasion for execution of will dated 11.6.1975; will Ex.D -1 dated 11.6.1975 was surrounded by suspicious circumstances; relationship between father and his only child i.e. the plaintiff being cordial, there was no reason to exclude her from inheritance, Evidence of the witnesses, who attested the wilt did not inspire confidence and evidence of Dr. Rattan Singh, PW -5 was to the effect that the deceased was not in a fit mental condition to make the will;