RSA 4 of 2008. 11.1.2008 Present: Mr. G.R.Palsra, counsel for the appellant. This is the defendant’s appeal against the concurrent findings of the two Courts below rejecting the Will purportedly executed by his mother in his favour. The facts of the case are that the parties to this judgment are sons/daughters of late Smt. Jito Devi, wife of late Shri Dhale Ram. Plaintiffs Dhani Ram and Anant Ram filed a suit for declaration that their mother died intestate and that Will Ex. DW-2/A set up by defendant No. 1 is forged and fictitious. The plaintiffs prayed that all consequent actions taken pursuant to the Will by which the property was mutated in the name of defendant No. 1 Roop Chand, appellant was illegal and not binding on the interests of the plaintiff. The learned trial Court after considering the evidence held that evidence of DW-2 Om Parkash and DW-3 Samsher Singh did not support the due execution of the Will. It was held as a fact that the Will was not scribed at the instance of the testator, but at the instance of the defendant. It was also held that the testator was not in sound disposing state of mind at the time when the Will was executed; the witnesses had stated that the deceased had put a left thumb impression on -2- the Will but the document showed that the thumb impression on the Will was of the right hand. The learned Court also held that the attesting witnesses have not been examined. In the totality of circumstances, it was held that the Will was forged and fictitious. Appeal carried to the Court of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Kullu was dismissed. The learned Court affirmed the findings of the Court below. The defendant is now in appeal. It has been urged that the Will Ex.PW-2/A has been duly proved and that the findings of the Courts below cannot be sustained. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that both the Courts were in error in holding that the Will had not been duly proved in accordance with law; that the scribe could be treated as an attesting witness which satisfies the conditions of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act proving the due execution of the Will. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The fact as to whether the Will is genuine or not is a question of fact, which cannot be gone into in second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Due attestation of the Will in accordance with law -3- is only one factor. The learned Court holds that the testator was not in a sound disposing mind and that the appellant was the person responsible for having the Will scribed. It also notes in detail the discrepancies in the statements of the defence witnesses which go to the root of the case, that is the thumb impression on the Will etc. In the circumstances, I do not find that there is any substantial question of law which requires to be decided by this Court. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. January 11, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.