) Sh. Varun Prakash vs Sh. Suresh Kumar Singhal on 18 August, 2015
(ii) Sudarshan Kumar Jain & Anr. (supra); (iii) D.N. Singhal & Ors.
CS347/2009
Sh. Puneet Prakash & Anr. Vs. Sh. Suresh Kumar Singhal Page 36 of 43
(supra); (iv) Plastic Chemicals Company (supra); (v) Jaswant Singh
(supra); (vi) Gurcharan Kaur & Anr. (supra); and (vii) State of
Haryana Vs. Ram Singh (supra) are of no help to plaintiffs accordingly
to make the certified copy of the Will per se admissible in evidence as a
public document. So, no judicial notice of certified copy of the Will
dated 25.10.1996 of Smt. Sona Devi on record of the case can be taken, it
being not a public document. Aforesaid certified copy of the will stands
not proved on record for want of testimony of any attesting witness and
nonproduction of its original whose loss has neither been alleged nor
proved. Plaintiffs have failed to prove that they only were beneficiaries of
estate of late Smt. Sona Devi consequent upon her demise to exclusion of
other class one legal heirs as per Hindu Succession Act. Suit is
accordingly bad for nonjoinder of other legal heirs of Smt. Sona Devi,
the necessary parties. Also, plaintiffs have failed to prove to have
become owner of suit property for want of cogent evidence on that count.