R.S.A. No. 4060 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 4060 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : 27.1.2009 Hardev Kaur .......... Appellant Versus Piara Singh & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the appellant. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgments and decree dated 9.1.2006 and 16.9.2008 passed by the learned Courts below vide which suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant for declaration and permanent injunction has been ordered to be dismissed. The plaintiff-appellant who is widow of predeceased son of Avtar Singh father of the defendant No.1, claimed that she was entitled to inherit the property falling to her husband i.e. Lakhwant Singh. The suit was opposed on the plea that plaintiff-appellant had no right or interest in the property inasmuch as the respondent-defendants have inherited the property under the registered Will executed by Avtar Singh. The defendant-respondents brought on record three registered Wills . In all the three Wills the property in dispute was bequeathed to the defendant- R.S.A. No. 4060 of 2008 (O&M) -2- respondents. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the following substantial questions of law arise for consideration by this Court in this appeal :- 1. Whether the Wills executed by Avtar Singh @ Uttar Singh were surrounded by suspicious circumstance ? 2. Whether the judgments of the learned Courts below are contrary to the evidence brought on record by the parties? The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, is that execution of three Wills without making provisions of maintenance of appellant was surrounded by suspicious circumstance and, therefore, the Court below erred in law in relying upon the said Wills. There is no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. It is proved on record that the plaintiff-appellant during the life time of Avtar Singh had claimed maintenance, however, her suit was dismissed. It was proved on record that during life time of Lakhwant Singh he was separated from the family and was not living with Avtar Singh. The learned Courts below have also recorded a concurrent finding of fact that there was no material on record to show that the property was ancestral in the hands of Avtar Singh. Merely because three Wills were executed can not be a suspicious circumstance as alleged. The learned Courts below have rightly held that the Wills were executed under the changed circumstances and in every Will the changed circumstance find mention. R.S.A. No. 4060 of 2008 (O&M) -3- Thus, the substantial questions of law as framed do not arise. In any case the questions raised deserve to be answered against the appellant- plaintiff. Consequently, finding no merit, the appeal is ordered to be dismissed in limine. 27.1.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE