IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAN AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA 879 of 2008 Date of decision: 15.10.2009 Baljit Singh and others appellants vs Bhag Singh and others Respondent Present: Mr.Raman Mahajan, Advocate Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.S.BEDI,J. A concurrent finding of fact has been recorded by the courts below pertaining to two Wills dated 23.6.1978 (Annexure P-1), alleged to have been executed in favour of the plaintiffs and defendant No.3 and dated 10.11.1972, alleged to have been executed in favour of defendants 1 and 2. Both the Wills have been disbelieved by the courts below holding that the plaintiff-respondents along with other natural heirs of Uttam Singh are entitled to inherit the property in dispute belonging to Uttam Singh as per natural succession. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the Will dated 10.11.1972 is a registered Will and stands proved by DW3 Harbhajan Singh Grewal, Tehsildar by appearing in the court. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I am of the opinion that the attesting witnesses have not been able to substantiate the execution of Will dated 10.11.1972. Mere registration of the Will is not sufficient enough to hold the same to be a validly executed Will. No law point arises for adjudication in the appeal. The appeal is,thus, dismissed. October 15 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE