Case Note & Summary
The present Testamentary Suit sought Probate in respect of a Writing dated 24th March 1997 (‘the said Will’), which the Plaintiff propounded as being the last Will and Testament of one Mansukhlal Kanji Shah (‘the deceased’). The deceased passed away on 2nd December 1998 leaving behind his wife Jayaben, son Prakash (Plaintiff), and two married daughters Lata and Sunita (Defendant). The Plaintiff, named as executor, sought probate. The Defendant filed a Caveat challenging the Will as forged, fabricated, and unnatural. The wife and other daughter consented to probate. Issues were framed on whether the Plaintiff proved valid execution and whether the Defendant proved forgery. The Plaintiff examined an attesting witness who confirmed the testator's signature and those of the witnesses. The Defendant argued that the Will was unnatural as it excluded her without reason, but the Court found that the testator had already given her gifts during his lifetime and there was strained relationship. The Court held that the Plaintiff had discharged the burden of proving due execution and attestation under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and that the Defendant failed to prove forgery or undue influence. The Court granted probate of the Will to the Plaintiff.
Headnote
A) Succession Law - Will - Proof of Execution - Section 63 Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 68 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Propounder must prove due execution and attestation by examining at least one attesting witness - Court held that plaintiff discharged burden by examining attesting witness who confirmed signatures of testator and witnesses - Held that execution and attestation were valid (Paras 1-10). B) Succession Law - Will - Suspicious Circumstances - Unnatural Will - Propounder must dispel suspicion when will is unnatural or excludes natural heirs - Court found that exclusion of defendant daughter was explained by strained relations and prior gifts - Held that no undue influence or forgery was proved (Paras 11-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff proved that the deceased validly executed the Will dated 24.3.1997, and whether the defendant proved that the said Will was forged and fabricated.
Final Decision
The Court granted Probate of the Will dated 24th March 1997 to the Plaintiff, Prakashkumar Mansukhlal Shah, as the executor named therein.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on propounder of will
- due execution and attestation
- Section 63 Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- Section 68 Indian Evidence Act
- 1872
- unnatural will
- suspicious circumstances
- testamentary capacity
