IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RSA No. 107 of 2010 Date of decision : September 28, 2010 Sukhan Devi & others. …Appellants. Versus Madan Lal & another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellants : Mr. R.K. Gautam, Senior Advocate with Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. H.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. Appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit, challenging the Will made by common predecessor of the parties, namely, Kartara in respect of suit land, which was held by said Kartara as a tenant. Will was made in the year 1989 and Kartara died thereafter. Admittedly, proprietary rights in respect of bequeathed property have been conferred. Conferment of proprietary rights of tenancy land takes place automatically, on and with effect from the appointed day, which is 3.10.1975. That means Kartara became the owner on and with effect from the aforesaid date, notified for the purpose of Section 104 of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 3. Kartara’s Will was challenged by the appellants- plaintiffs on the ground that tenancy rights cannot be willed away. In view of the fact that Kartara became owner by virtue of Section 104 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, on and with effect from the appointed day i.e. 3.10.1975, it cannot be said that the suit property was held by him as a tenant, when he died or for that matter he made the Will. 4. No other point is involved. Since, the point involved, does not raise any substantial question of law and the execution of the Will is not seriously challenged, appeal is dismissed. September 28, 2010(vt) ( Surjit Singh ), J