JUDGEMENT
V.K.BALI. J. -
(1.) Will dated 28-1-1977
executed by the testator Smt. Anandi Devi
wife of Ganeshi Lai, which was registered in
the office of Sub-Registrar, Ajmer on 1-2-
1977 was proved. Respondents did raise objection in
opposing the cause of the appellant for grant of
probate of the Will by pleading that Anandi Bai had no right or title to
execute any Will and had not executed any
Will on 28-1-1977 nor was she physically
and mentally fit to execute the same. There
was no plea, however, pertaining to map
annexed with the registered Will. The Will
has since been held to be a genuine document having been duly executed but for the
plan attached with the Will and on that count
alone, application made by the appellant
herein under Sec. 276 of the Indian Succession Act, for grant of probate of the Will
dated 28-1 -1977 has been dismissed by the
learned Distt. Judge, Ajmer vide order dated
20-8-1987 which order has since been con
firmed on the same very ground by the
learned single .judge or this court vide order dated 13-2-1992 recorded in Civil First
Appeal No. 48/88. It is against these two
orders passed by the learned Distt. Judge
and the learned single Judge that the
present appeal has been filed u/S. 18 of the
Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the
appellant vehemently contends that once the
Will (Ex. 1) has been proved which contained
specific portions that were to fall to the
shares of three daughters of Anandi Bai and
which portions were not at variance with
portions that were to fall to the share of three
daughters in the plan (Ex. 2) and further
that the plan (Ex. 2) attached to the Will was
not even questioned, the Courts ought to
have held the entire Will to have been duly
executed and granted the probate in favour
of the appellant. In any case the appellant
was entitled to probate of Will (Ex. 1) which
the appellant is prepared to have even now
and that even though there is no discrepancy in the respective portions allotted to
daughters of Anandi Bai in Will (Ex. 1) and
one depicted in plan (Ex. 2) the appellant is
prepared to have probate as per shares mentioned in the Will (Ex. 1), further contends
the learned counsel.
(3.) With a view to appreciate the contentions of the learned counsel, as noted above,
it would be necessary to take into consideration facts giving rise to the present appeal.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.