Singh was suffering from cancer and was also a patient of T.B. 19. The trial court also found that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit land as the said fact has been admitted by one of the defendant’s witnesses namely Gurnam Singh. 20. The First Appellate Court set aside the finding of the trial court holding that the trial court was wrongly persuaded by insignificant circumstances to hold that the Will in favour of the defendant nos. 2 to 6 is not genuine and that it is surrounded by suspicious circumstances. The First Appellate Court eventually passed a decree for joint possession in favour of defendant which was assailed by plaintiff Lehna Singh before the High Court by preferring an appeal under Section 41 of the Punjab Act. The High Court, under the impugned Judgment, allowed the appeal, set aside the appellate decree passed by the District Judge, Sangrur, restoring the Judgment and decree passed by the trial court.16 21. The High Court has discussed the evidence