R.S.A. No. 4639 of 2010 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.S.A. No. 4639 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 23, 2011 Ashwani Kumar and others …..Appellants Vs. Shashi Kumar and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.B.S. Sewak, Advocate for the appellants. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Defendants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below decreeing the suit of the plaintiff- respondent No.1 Shashi Kumar to the effect that plaintiff is owner in possession of the suit property situated at Amritsar and restraining the defendant- appellants from alienating or selling the same, in any manner. The counter claim filed by the defendants claiming 5/7th share in the property was also dismissed. The finding of the Courts below regarding the R.S.A. No. 4639 of 2010 (O&M) [2] authenticity of Will Ex.P1 in favour plaintiff- respondents, on appreciation of evidence, is based upon the Will Ex.P1 which has been found to have been validity executed by Beli Ram. The Will propounded by the defendant- appellants Ex.DW1/1 dated January 8, 1990 has also been believed to be correct by the Courts below but the Courts below have arrived at a conclusion that Will Ex.P1 in favour of the plaintiff- respondent and Will Ex.DW1/1 have placed both the parties in equal position regarding the properties left by deceased Beli Ram. Counsel for the defendant- appellants has vehemently contended that the Courts below have wrongly held Will Ex.P1 to be genuine Will as the said Will has been allegedly handed to the plaintiffs by Parkash Kaur, who has not been examined. Counsel for the defendant- appellants has submitted that there are number of suspicious circumstances which have not been clarified by the propounder of the Will. The Courts below have held that Will Ex.P1 in favour of the plaintiff- respondent No.1 pertains to the property at Amritsar whereas the earlier registered Will dated January 8, 1990 executed by Beli Ram pertains to his property in District Mandi (Himachal Pradesh). Names of the plaintiff- respondents are specifically excluded from the earlier Will Ex.DW1/1. Will Ex.DW1/1 has not been seriously disputed by the plaintiff- respondents. After hearing counsel for the defendant- appellants at length, I am of the opinion that the concurrent finding of fact has been arrived at by the Courts below regarding the validity of the Will Ex.P1 dated October 31, R.S.A. No. 4639 of 2010 (O&M) [3] 2000. No substantial question of law is involved in the case as there is no scope for re-appreciation of evidence in the present case. Dismissed. February 23, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE