JUDGMENT V.K. Jhanji, J. - The first appeal is directed against order dated 22.3.1999 passed by Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, whereby petition filed by Charanjit Singh, respondent, under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of letters of administration of Will dated 18.4.1985 executed by Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik, has been allowed. 2. In brief, the facts are that Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik died on 25.10.1987 at Ludhiana. He left behind four sons and two daughters, Charanjit Singh, respondent filed petition under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act seeking letters of administration in respect of the property of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik, i.e. 145 shares, held by him in two companies, namely, Traco Cable Co. Limited and Sehsa Saye Paper Board Mills Limited, and lease hold rights in regard to lease-deed dated 29.9.1986 of which Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik was a sub-lessee. Upon notice of the petition, only one son and a daughter of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik, namely, Col. Damanjit Singh and Joginder Pal Kaur contested the petition. In their respective written statements, they denied execution of Will dated 18.4.1953 alleged to have been executed by Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik in favour of Charanjit Singh. Col. Damanjit Singh on the other hand set up Will Dated 31.1.1984 alleged to have been executed by Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik in his favour. He alleged that the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana, has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition inasmuch as Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik had no immovable property in district Ludhiana. In replication Charanjit Singh denied that his father had executed Will dated 31.1.1984 in favour of Col. Damanjit Singh. He reiterated that the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana, has the jurisdiction to entertain the petition. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, to whom the petition was entrusted for decision framed the following issues :- 1. Whether this Court has jurisdiction to try this petition ? OPP. 2. Whether on 18.4.1984 Dr. Sajjan Singh executed a valid Will in favour of the petitioner. If so, its effect ? OPP. 3. Whether Dr. Sajjan Singh executed a Will dated 31.1.1984 in favour of Damanjit Singh. If so, its effect ? OPD. 4. Relief. 3. Charanjit Singh in order to prove Will dated 18.4.1985, examined PW-1, Mohan Lal, Registration Clerk in the Office of Sub-Registrar, Ludhiana. If so, its effect ? OPP. 3. Whether Dr. Sajjan Singh executed a Will dated 31.1.1984 in favour of Damanjit Singh. If so, its effect ? OPD. 4. Relief. 3. Charanjit Singh in order to prove Will dated 18.4.1985, examined PW-1, Mohan Lal, Registration Clerk in the Office of Sub-Registrar, Ludhiana. He on the basis of the summoned record deposed that Will dated 18.4.1985 was prepared in two parts one in English and the other in Punjabi. Both the documents were registered. PW-2, Surinder Singh son of Jawand Singh was examined to prove entry at Sr. No. 96 dated 18.4.1985 in the deed-writers register. He deposed that his father Jawand Singh was working as deed-writer in the Old Courts, Ludhiana. He died on 25.5.1992. He had made an entry regarding Will dated 18.4.1985 in his register. AW-3, Sohan Lal, Record-Keeper in the officer of Sub-Registrar, Ludhiana, brought the record pertaining to Will dated 18.4.1985 maintained by their office. AW-4 Tehal Singh son of Gurcharan Singh and AW-5 Sujan Singh son of Gopi Chand, being attesting witnesses, were examined to prove due execution of Will dated 18.4.1985. AW-5, Harminder Singh son of Sohan Singh AW-6, Krishan Lal son of Lal Chand, were examined to prove that Charanjit Singh alone was rendering services to Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik. AW-6, P.S. Ahuja, handwriting and finger expert was examined to prove the signatures of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik on Will dated 18.4.1985. He on the basis of comparison made from the signatures on bank specimen signatures card and registered general power of attorney dated 22.2.1986 opined that signatures of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik on Will dated 18.4.1985 tally with his signatures on the bank specimen signatures card and registered general power of attorney dated 22.2.1986. Charanjit Singh appeared as AW-1 and deposed that his father was living with him in House No. 7, Model Town, Ludhiana. He deposed that his two sisters are married and are living with their in-laws. His two brothers, Surjit Singh and Narinder Pal Singh are residing abroad for more than 25-30 years and third brother, Col. Damanjit Singh was serving in the Army for the last 25-30 years. He stated that he alone used to serve his father and was the one who on his death performed his last rites. He stated that none of his brother attended the Bhog ceremony. Damanjit Singh was serving in the Army for the last 25-30 years. He stated that he alone used to serve his father and was the one who on his death performed his last rites. He stated that none of his brother attended the Bhog ceremony. He proved signatures of his father on Will dated 18.4.1985. He stated that his father had also executed power of attorney in his favour to manage his property. Anil Kumar, Clerk, Punjab National Bank, Model Town, Ludhiana, was examined to produce the original specimen signatures cards of the account in the name of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik. 4. In order to prove Will dated 31.1.1984, Col. Damanjit Singh had made statement as RW-1. In his statement, he stated that during the year 1987 when he was posted at Bhatinda, his father visited him in January and April and at that time, Will dated 31.1.1984 was handed over to him. He admitted that his father was residing with Charanjit Singh but stated that he was maltreating him. He also examined Sardara Singh Parmar, hand-writing and document expert, Phillaur, as RW-2. RW-3, Kulwant Singh Ahluwalia was examined to prove that Will dated 31.1.1984 was typed in his presence and at his dictation but at the instructions of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik. He stated that after the Will was typed, he took the Will to the house of Mohinder Singh, Advocate, where Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik read out the same and after admitting its contents to be correct, signed it as testator in his presence and in the presence of Mohinder Singh and Dr. Parminder Singh, thereafter, he and Mohinder Singh signed the Will as attesting witnesses and Dr. Parminder Singh examined the testator and signed a certificate on the Will that the testator was in a young disposing mind. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he and Mohinder Singh are practicing on the Income-tax and sales-tax side and sit in the same chamber. He admitted that he had not maintained any register or record of the Will drafted by him. He admitted that he had maintained any register or record of the Will drafted by him. He admitted that there are regular deed-writers at Ludhiana. He stated that he had come to know Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik 3-4 years before his death. He stated that he never visited the house where the testator was living. He admitted that he had maintained any register or record of the Will drafted by him. He admitted that there are regular deed-writers at Ludhiana. He stated that he had come to know Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik 3-4 years before his death. He stated that he never visited the house where the testator was living. In regard to sound disposing mind of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik, he stated that a certificate in this regard was typed at his dictation. He admitted that Dr. Parminder Singh is son of Mohinder Singh. He stated that he does not remember the contents of the Will nor can say when Will was executed. RW-4, Mohinder Singh stated that Kulwant Singh had brought the typed Will at his house where Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik signed and Dr. Parminder Singh, his son, signed the Will and the certificate. He stated that Dr. Parminder Singh had medically examined the testator and found him in a sound disposing mind. In cross-examination, he stated that he is in possession of the Will as the same was given to him by Col. Damanjit Singh six months prior to refresh his memory. He stated that his son Dr. Parminder Singh was present per chance though he was posted at that time at Jalandhar. RW-5, Naginder Tripathi, Assistant. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, Noida (Ghaziabad) was examined to prove that lease-hold rights of plot No. F-42/Sector 40, Noida, were in the name of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik. RW-6, Gurcharan Singh in his cross-examination conceded that Charanjit lived with his father from the very beginning. In rebuttal, Charanjit Singh examined N.K. Jain, Documents expert as AW-8, who in his statement stated that the signatures of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik on Will dated 31.1.1984 do not tally with the standard signatures of Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik and is a clear-cut forgery and made in pre-hand process. 5. On appreciation of the statements made by the attesting witnesses and also the hand-writing experts, the learned Additional District Judge held that Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik during his life time had executed Will dated 18.4.1985 in favour of Charanjit Singh in lieu of services rendered by him. Will dated 31.1.1984 set up by Col. Damanjit Singh held to be a suspicious document. He opined that in Will, Ex. Sajjan Singh Malik during his life time had executed Will dated 18.4.1985 in favour of Charanjit Singh in lieu of services rendered by him. Will dated 31.1.1984 set up by Col. Damanjit Singh held to be a suspicious document. He opined that in Will, Ex. D-1, though it is mentioned that the testator has extremely good relations with his wife and children but did not make any provision for maintenance of his wife. No explanation whatsoever was given as to why the other heirs were being deprived of the property. Certificate of Dr. Parminder Singh son of Mohinder Singh attesting witness of the Will, was typed out at the dictation of Kulwant Singh, Advocate, and that too before the testator was medically examined by him. Will dated 31.1.1984 is of one page which is a judicial paper. Certificate of Dr. Parminder Singh is on the left side margin of the said paper. It has not been explained as to how certificate could have been typed before the testator was examined by any doctor. Mohinder Singh Advocate, in his statement conceded that his son Dr. Parminder Singh, at that time was posted at Jalandhar but strangely on the date of execution of the Will he was present in the house. Neither Mohinder Singh, Advocate, nor Kulwant Singh, Advocate, were ever the counsel for Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik. The properties are also not correctly described in Will dated 31.1.1984. Will is alleged to have been executed in January, 1984 but is stated to have been given by Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik to Col. Damanjit Singh in April, 1987. The fact as to why Dr. Sajjan Singh Malik kept the Will with him for 3-1/2 years and handed over the same to Col. Damanjit Singh only in April, 1987, has not been explained. On acceptance of Will dated 8.4.1985 and discarding of Will dated 31.1.1984, the learned Additional District Judge accepted the petition qua 145 shares worth Rs. 150/- each and granted letters of administration. Hence this appeal. 6. In this first appeal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Col. Damanjit Singh appellant contended that the learned Additional District Judge has not correctly appreciated the statements of witnesses in regard to both the Wills. 150/- each and granted letters of administration. Hence this appeal. 6. In this first appeal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Col. Damanjit Singh appellant contended that the learned Additional District Judge has not correctly appreciated the statements of witnesses in regard to both the Wills. Counsel stated that the learned Additional District Judge has observed that signatures on both the Wills appear to be genuine and if this is so then how Will dated 18.4.1985 in favour of Charanjit Singh accepted. In answer to these submissions, Mr. M.L. Sarin, Sr. Advocate, appearing on behalf of Charanjit Singh contended that it has come in the statements of witnesses examined by Col. Damanjit Singh and his statement as well that Charanjit Singh alone was residing with the testator. He contended that in lieu of services rendered by Charanjit Singh, his father executed registered Will in his favour. He also submitted that only Col. Damanjit Singh and Joginder Pal Kaur are contesting Will dated 18.4.1985 and all other heirs are not contesting the same. 7. On carefully going through the statements of witnesses examined by Charanjit Singh and also by Col. Damanjit Singh, I find that the Learned Additional District Judge has not committed any illegality in accepting Will dated 18.4.1985 and discarding Will dated 31.1.1984. It is the admitted case of the parties that Charanjit Singh alone was rendering services of the testator whereas his two sons were staying abroad for the last 25-36 years and Col. Damanjit Singh was serving in the Army. The daughters of the testator were happily married and living with their in-laws. The only property left by the testator was 145 shares in two companies and lease-hold rights of plot at Noida. Considering that the property left behind by the testator was not very sizeable and if the testator had decided to give the same to Charanjit Singh, his son, who alone had been rendering services to him, depriving others, cannot be said to be a suspicious circumstance. Will set up by Charanjit Singh was prepared in two parts : one in English and the other in Punjabi and both were registered with the Sub-Registrar. In case testator had executed Will dated 31.1.1984 in favour of Col. Will set up by Charanjit Singh was prepared in two parts : one in English and the other in Punjabi and both were registered with the Sub-Registrar. In case testator had executed Will dated 31.1.1984 in favour of Col. Damanjit Singh, he would have certainly made a mention of the same in his latter Will dated 18.4.1984 in Will dated 18.4.1985 which is a registered document, is also indicative of the fact that the Will dated 31.1.1984 set up by Col. Damanjit Singh is not a genuine document. Accordingly, I am of the view that the appreciation of evidence by the learned Additional District Judge in accepting Will dated 18.4.1985 to be genuine one and Will dated 31.1.1984 to be a suspicious document is well-justified and calls for no interference. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, Col. Damanjit Singh, next contended that petition for grant of letters of administration filed by Charanjit Singh was regarding two properties, i.e. 145 shares held by the testator in two companies and the other being a lease-hold rights plot at Noida, whereas the learned Additional District Judge has granted letters of administration regarding the shares and no order whatsoever has been passed in regard to lease-hold rights relating plot at Noida. In support of his submission, he cited a judgment of the Lahore High Court in Sardar Singh and another v. Teja Singh and others, AIR 1946 Lahore 277, wherein it was held that petition for grant of letters of administration with Will annexed thereto must cover the entire estate of the deceased and in case where it omits to include the whole estate of the deceased. It is liable to be thrown out. There is no dispute with the view taken by the Lahore High Court. Charanjit Singh had filed petition regarding the entire estate of the deceased but it appears that the learned Additional District Judge while granting relief has granted letters of administration only in regard to the share held by the testator in two companies. In Sardar Singhs case (supra) the entire property of the deceased had not been included in the petition itself and on finding so, the High Court remanded the matter to the District Judge giving liberty to the applicants to amend their application for letters of administration, by including the entire estate of the deceased. In Sardar Singhs case (supra) the entire property of the deceased had not been included in the petition itself and on finding so, the High Court remanded the matter to the District Judge giving liberty to the applicants to amend their application for letters of administration, by including the entire estate of the deceased. In any case, the point raised by the counsel has become redundant inasmuch as the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, Noida, has already transferred the lease-hold rights relating to plot of the deceased in favour of Charanjit Singh and more so, Will dated 18.4.1985 has been found to be genuine and, therefore, there will be no justification to remand this case to the Additional District Judge for making correction in the order. 9. No other point was urged. 10. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal being without any merit shall stand dismissed. Appeal dismissed.