The properties purported to have been transferred by reason of the said deeds of sale forming subject matter of the grant under the Will.
No probate was obtained in respect of the said Will dated 30.10.1997.
Appellant herein filed an application for his impleadment in the said probate proceedings.
It was allowed by an order dated 24.12.2004.
Both the sons of Har Bhagwan filed objections thereto.
Indisputably, Raj Kumar executed two deeds of sale dated 20.06.2003 and 27.06.2003 in favour of one Amit Pahwa.
Even numberobjection from other legal heirs of the late Har Bhagwan was obtained.
They filed an application for grant of probate in the year 2000.
In furtherance thereto, a purported deed of sale is said to have been executed in respect of the other property on 29.08.2003.
Raj Kumar propounded another Will of the said Har Bhagwan which was allegedly executed on 30.10.1997.
Immediately after execution of the said deeds, the said Amit Pahwa entered into an agreement to sell dated 25.07.2003 in respect of one of the properties.
270 OF 2007 Arising out of S.L.P. Civil No.
W I T H CONTEMPT PETITION NO.
By reason of the impugned judgment, the High Court has reversed the said judgment and order on an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the respondents herein.
285 of 2005 and 13.11.2006 passed in Review Petition No.
393 of 2006 by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court.
6795 of 2007 B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
