- (1.) I. The parties to litigation The property, which was the subject of acquisition in respect of which a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act came to be made, admittedly belonged to one Ishar Singh. He had been married to a person by name Seva Devi but he had no issue through her. His brother's son was Jaswant Singh, who is arrayed as 3rd respondent herein. The 3rd respondent was, however, working in a Government of India undertaking at Dhanbad in another State. His brother's wife was Harjinder Kaur. She was resident of Amritsar and she was the power of attorney of Jaswant Singh. She is arrayed as the 4th respondent. One Udham Singh claimed that he was the foster son of Ishar Singh. Udham Singh's daughter was Ajit Kaur. The contest is essentially between the appellants, who claimed as successors-in-interest to Udham Singh tracing his title to a registered gift deed said to have been executed by Ishar Singh after the Will and the respondents No. 3 and 4, who set up a Will executed by Ishar Singh in respect of which a probate was also issued. The Reference Court upheld the claim of respondent Nos. 3 and 4. II. The legal issue for adjudication
(2.) The point for consideration in the case is whether the grant of probate finally concluded the title to the property and consequently, to the money which was assessed as payable to the legatee of the property. The issue shall also be to examine the merit of contention of the appellants tracing their title and entitlement to Udham Singh. There are also subsidiary issues relating to validity of reference under Land Acquisition Act. Some more facts which are necessary ought to therefore immediately follow. III. History of litigation
(3.) The property acquired by the Government belonged to Ishar Singh. He had no children and he had executed a Will in favour of Jaswant Singh-3rd respondent on 16.07.1948. The Will had also been registered on at the Sub Registrar's office on 11.08.1948. After the death of Ishar Singh, Jaswant Singh applied for grant of probate. This was contested by Udham Singh, who claimed the very same property as having been gifted to him under a registered document on 21.09.1952. The contest for grant, which was the subject of bequest had been that the testator Ishar Singh had divested himself of property by gift deed in favour of Udham Singh and therefore, the Will did not operate to constitute a valid bequest. The Court of Probate rejected the contention and held by reference to case law that issue of title itself was not relevant and only point for consideration was that whether the Will executed by the deceased Ishar Singh was true or not. He, therefore, passed an order on 27.07.1953 for issue of a grant on the basis of Will.;