Sohanla Pandey vs Rajjan Kumar Pandey
2021 Latest Caselaw 373 MP

                                                          1                                 SA-1484-2020
                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                           SA-1484-2020
                                      (SOHANLA PANDEY Vs RAJJAN KUMAR PANDEY AND OTHERS)

                      3
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 01-03-2021
                              Ms. Sanjna Sahni, learned counsel for the appellant.
                              Record of Courts below have been received.
                              Heard on the question of admission.
                              Having heard, perused the records and the impugned judgments, this
                      appeal is admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of

                      law.
                                   "A. Whether the plaintiff has legally proved the due execution,
                             attestation and validity of the will dated 8/03/2005 (Exhibit P-2) as
                             required under section 63 (c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 ?
                                   B. Whether the will dated 8/03/2005 (Exhibit P-2) has been
                             illegally disbelieved by both the courts below by merely observing that
                             signatures of Laxman Prasad on the same are different with his
                             signatures on other documents without recording any finding that his
                             signatures on that will are not his whereas plaintiff has legally proved that

                             those signatures are of Laxman Prasad alone ?
                                   C. Whether defendants 1 and 2 claiming benefit under the will
                             dated 16/11/2000 (Exhibit D-1) were legally bound to prove its due
                             execution and attestation and to remove all suspicious circumstances
                             surrounding its execution whereas the courts below have illegally put the
                             burden upon plaintiff to disprove the said will ?
                                   D. Whether from the material available on record the plaintiff has
                             legally proved the due execution of the documents dated 5/02/2005
                             (Exhibit P-5) and 3/03/2005 (Exhibit P-8) by Laxman Prasad whereas
                             the courts below have illegally declined to act upon those documents for
                             wholly irrelevant considerations ?

Signature Not                 Issue notice of this admission and on I.A. No. 7344/2020 filed under
 SAN
Verified

Digitally signed by
NAVEEN NAGDEVE
Date: 2021.03.02
11:10:23 IST
                                     2                           SA-1484-2020
Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC along with copy of framed substantial questions
of law to the respondents on payment of PF within one week by both modes,

returnable by four weeks.

Meanwhile, both the parties are directed not to create third party interest in the suit property and no construction shall be made over the suit property till the next date of hearing.

List after four weeks.

(AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

navin