MAHESH GROVER, J. - (1.) THE present appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against judgments and decrees dated 10.8.1988 and 8.1.1991 passed by Sub Judge 1st Class, Dasuya (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court') and the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur (hereinafter described as 'the lower Appellate Court'), respectively.
(2.) THE appellants have assailed the impugned judgment on the issue of validity of the Will which has been discarded by the trial Court as well as by the lower Appellate Court. Mehnga Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the appellants and the respondents, is alleged to have executed a Will dated 26.6.1985 barely ten days before his death. The Will though registered did not find favour with the trial Court and the lower Appellate Court, since Mehnga Singh was given to signing his documents and not thumb marking them which was the case in the Will. The last document in the shape of a bank receipt was signed by Mehnga Singh on 31.5.1985 (Exhibit DW5/B). No cogent explanation could be given as to why the executor of the Will had deviated from his practice of signing the documents in preference to thumb marking.
(3.) BESIDES , there is overwhelming evidence on record to show that Mehnga Singh was living with respondent No. 1-Surjit Kaur, his daughter. This is fortified from the fact that all the relevant documents pertaining to disbursement of his pension and bank transactions etc. were produced in evidence by respondent No. 1-Surjit Kaur. Both the Courts below have found that the Will is shrouded by suspicious circumstances and no worthwhile evidence has been shown which could persuade this Court to take a contrary view.;