In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No.2439 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.4.2011 Puran Chand ......petitioner Versus Labh Singh and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Brijender Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-petitioner has filed a suit for declaration that he was joint owner in possession of the suit land and further that the Will dated 29.10.1997 alleged to have been executed by Swaran Ram was false, fabricated, illegal, wrong, nonest, null and void and the same was liable to be set aside. Vide order dated 14.12.2010, Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.) framed the following issue:- “2-A: Whether Will dated 29.10.1997 is liable to be declared as null and void being executed by incompetent person Swaran Ram, as alleged. If so, its effect? OPP” Hence, the present petition by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the onus to prove the Will was on the propounder. The trial Court had erred in placing the onus on the plaintiff to establish that the Will was null and void. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am Civil Revision No.2439 of 2011 (O&M) -2- of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be dismissed. The petitioner by way of the suit has challenged the validity of the Will. It has been averred by the petitioner in the plaint, Annexure P-1, that the alleged Will was illegal and was liable to be set aside as Swaran Ram was not maintaining good health and was a man of weak intellect due to old age. Swaran Ram had cordial relations with the plaintiff. Swaran Ram was not competent to bequeath the property in favour of defendants No.1 to 3 as the suit property was Joint Hindu Property. The Will in question was a forged and a fabricated document. Since the plaintiff himself was seeking that the Will in question be declared null and void on the basis of the grounds taken by him in the plaint, the trial Court has rightly placed the onus on the plaintiff to establish that the Will was null and void as it had been executed by an incompetent person. There is no doubt that the propounder of the Will has to establish that the Will in question was a genuine document and was free from any suspicious circumstances but in the present case, the validity of the Will in question has been challenged by the petitioner on various grounds and it is for the petitioner to establish the chellenge set up by him. Hence, no ground for interference by this Court is made out. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE April 19, 2011 anita