Case Note & Summary
The Regular First Appeal was filed by the legal representatives of the deceased defendant in O.S. No. 4/2013 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, challenging the judgment and decree dated 01.04.2017 granting probate of the Will dated 18.04.1996 executed by Vimalabai Hanamantrao Gudur in favor of the plaintiff. The property in question, bearing TP 720 (old) and new No. 1006 in Ward No. II of Bilagi Town, was allotted to the share of Hanamantarao and his wife Vimalabai. Hanamantarao died in 1984, and Vimalabai succeeded to the property. The plaintiff and the defendant are the sons of Hanamantarao and Vimalabai. The plaintiff filed the suit for probate of the Will, claiming that Vimalabai executed the Will on 18.04.1996 bequeathing the property to him. The defendant contested the suit, alleging that the Will was not genuine and was executed under suspicious circumstances. The trial court, after considering the evidence, granted probate. The appellants (legal representatives of the defendant) challenged this decision. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the attesting witnesses and the propounder, and found that the Will was duly executed and attested in accordance with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The court held that the propounder had discharged the burden of proof and that the suspicious circumstances alleged were not sufficient to invalidate the Will. The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and decree of the trial court were confirmed.
Headnote
A) Succession Law - Probate - Will - Burden of Proof - The propounder of a will must prove its due execution and attestation as per Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The court must be satisfied that the testator was of sound disposing mind and understood the nature and effect of the will. (Paras 5-10) B) Succession Law - Probate - Suspicious Circumstances - Mere existence of suspicious circumstances does not invalidate a will if the propounder explains them satisfactorily. The court must examine the totality of evidence to determine the genuineness of the will. (Paras 11-15) C) Succession Law - Probate - Attestation - Under Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, a will must be attested by two or more witnesses, each having seen the testator sign or acknowledge the will. The attesting witnesses must sign in the presence of the testator. (Paras 16-20) D) Succession Law - Probate - Appellate Court's Scope - In an appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellate court can re-appreciate evidence but should not interfere with findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Will dated 18.04.1996 executed by Vimalabai Hanamantrao Gudur was proved to be genuine and validly executed, and whether the trial court erred in granting probate.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree dated 01.04.2017 passed in O.S. No.4/2013 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, granting probate of the Will dated 18.04.1996, is confirmed.
Law Points
- Probate
- Will
- Burden of proof
- Attestation
- Suspicious circumstances
- Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- Section 63
- Section 276
