R.S.A. No. 255 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 255 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 2.3.2009 Sh. Ashok Kumar Pandhi & others ....Appellants Versus Ashwani Kumar Pandhi ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Arun Palli, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.N.S.Sarup, Advocate & Mr.Sunil Garg, Advocate for the appellants. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. Delay of 3 days in filing the appeal is condoned. This is plaintiffs second appeal directed against the judgments of the learned trial Court dated 21.11.1998 and the first Appellate Court dated 21.7.2008. The appellants and respondents are descendants of one Sham Dass Pandhi whose estate is in dispute. The plaintiffs claimed that they are entitled to their share in the property, while the respondent set up a Will dated 31.12.1988 to contend that the same was to the exclusion of the appellants and they are not entitled to the relief claimed. Both the parties went to trial on the following issues :- R.S.A. No. 255 of 2009 (O&M) -2- 1. Whether the plaintiffs are co-owners and in joint possession of the property in dispute and entitled for the partition of the suit property?OPP 2. Whether the suit is not properly valued for the purpose of jurisdiction? If so, its effect?OPP 3. Whether Shri Sham Das Pandhi executed a valid Will dated 31.12.88 in favour of the defendant?OPD 4. Whether the suit is bad for the non-joinder and mis- joinder of the necessary parties?OPD 5. Whether suit is barred u/o 2 C.P.C.?OPD 6. Relief. On the basis of evidence before it, the learned trial Court concluded that the Will in question was a valid piece of document executed in favour of the respondent and to the exclusion of the appellants. In appeal, the findings of the learned trial Court were affirmed. In the present regular second appeal, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that there are numerous factors which point out to the suspicious nature of the document. He contended that the Will was executed on 31.12.1988 and there was interpolation in the Will as the last digit in figure '1989' was converted into '1988' and that further late Sham Dass Pandhi was a propertied man and all his previous transactions were scribed by a particular scribe who had been rendering service to the deceased, but in so far as the Will in question is concerned, it was scribed by a different scribe who even R.S.A. No. 255 of 2009 (O&M) -3- did not recognize the testator of the Will. It was next contended that there was no reason to exclude the appellants from the Will and that the Will being an unregistered document when viewed in this perspective cannot be said to be worth reliance. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and have perused the impugned judgments. Both the Courts below have concluded that the Will was a valid piece of document. The testator, Shri Sham Dass Pandhi while excluding the appellants from the purview of the Will had broadly given the following reasons which have also been delineated in the reasons given by the Courts below :- (i) Sufficient money is spent by him on the marriage of Ashok Kumar, Hari Krishan and Kanchan Bala. (ii) He has also given property to all of them even after their marriage. (iii)All three of them started litigation with him, resultantly dis-reputation for him. (iv) All three of them are following their own way and are not obeying deceased Sham Dass Pandhi. There is no denial to the fact that the appellants were litigating with the deceased which alone can be a sufficient factor to oust a particular heir or a particular set of heirs from inheritance. The mere fact that last digit occurring in figure '1989' has been converted into '1988' will not render a document suspicious and not worthy of reliance as this can be termed to be a simple human error and similarly the fact that it was scribed by a different scribe and not by R.S.A. No. 255 of 2009 (O&M) -4- the scribe who used to write documents for the testator, would ipso facto be not termed to be a suspicious circumstance, if the Will has been proved by other means and by following the process of law. A perusal of the impugned judgments shows that the contents of the Will were proved and therefore it can safely be termed to be a reflection of the testator's desire. No ground to interfere. Dismissed. 2.3.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss