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