RSA No. 3769 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- RSA No. 3769 of 2007 Date of decision: 22.02.2008 Piara Singh and others ...Appellants Versus Sukhwinder Kaur ...Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nirmal Yadav -.- Present : Mr. Baldev Raj Mahajan, Advocate for the Appellants -.- Nirmal Yadav, J. (Oral) This is plaintiffs' regular second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 06.05.1997 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Amritsar, dismissing their suit, which has later been affirmed in appeal, vide judgment and decree dated 31.07.2007 passed by learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc)/Fast Track Court, Amritsar. The appellants/plaintiffs claim to be exclusive owner in possession of the suit property on the basis of Will dated 03.08.1989, EX P1, executed by Joginder Singh, father of plaintiff No.1 and grand father of plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3. However, the respondent/defendants, an other son, wife and daughter of Joginder Singh, have denied the execution of the said Will by Joginder Singh. According to them, the alleged Will is fabricated, forged and bogus document. Both the Courts below, after going through the facts and evidence on record, have come to the conclusion that the alleged RSA No. 3769 of 2007 2 Will is shrouded by suspicious circumstances. As per the Will, Joginder Singh, the testator of the Will, has excluded his own wife and other children from inheriting him. Even the widow of another son, namely, Surjit Singh, who pre-deceased Joginder Singh, has also been excluded from inheritance. The other circumstances, like the additional signatures of Joginder Singh have been found on the back side of the Will, which have been blemished. Besides the above stated circumstances, the alleged Will was not got registered. There is no ground to take a view contrary to the one, which has been taken by both the Courts below. It cannot be said that the findings recorded by both the Courts below are either perverse or based on no evidence. No question of law, muchless substantial question of law having been arisen for consideration in the instant appeal, it is dismissed. (Nirmal Yadav) Judge February 22, 2008 mohan