The following paragraph numbers of the judgement can be helpful for your situation: The paragraph discussing the role of attesting witnesses and their signatures as key parameters in establishing the due execution of the will is (!) . The paragraph highlighting that the credibility and consistency of witnesses’ testimonies are significant, and that the absence of specific details like a mention of the testator’s thumbprint by one witness does not necessarily invalidate the will if other witnesses affirm proper execution and the formalities were otherwise observed is (!) . These sections collectively suggest that the overall credibility, consistency, and the totality of evidence from witnesses are crucial factors in determining the validity of the will, especially when some details are missing from certain witnesses' statements.

Dhanpat vs Sheo Ram (Deceased) through LRs.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2020 Supreme(SC) 286

L.NAGESWARA RAO, HEMANT GUPTA
Dhanpat – Appellant
Versus
Sheo Ram (Deceased) through LRs. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Rishi Malhotra, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Ajay Kumar, Advocate

Judgement Key Points

The following paragraph numbers of the judgement can be helpful for your situation:

The paragraph discussing the role of attesting witnesses and their signatures as key parameters in establishing the due execution of the will is (!) .
The paragraph highlighting that the credibility and consistency of witnesses’ testimonies are significant, and that the absence of specific details like a mention of the testator’s thumbprint by one witness does not necessarily invalidate the will if other witnesses affirm proper execution and the formalities were otherwise observed is (!) .

These sections collectively suggest that the overall credibility, consistency, and the totality of evidence from witnesses are crucial factors in determining the validity of the will, especially when some details are missing from certain witnesses' statements.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on 27th March, 2014 whereby the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the courts below were set aside and the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff was decreed.

2. The High Court has framed the following two substantial questions of law:

“1. Whether the Will dated 30.4.1980 Ex.D-3 was surrounded by suspicious circumstances and due execution thereof was also not proved, in accordance with the requirements of Section 63 of the Succession Act.

2. Whether the learned courts below have completely misread, misconstrued and misinterpreted the evidence available on record, particularly the Will Ex.D-3, because of which the impugned judgments cannot be sustained.”

3. The admitted facts are that one Misri was the grandfather of the Plaintiff-Sheo Ram and defendant No. 5-Sohan Lal and defendant Nos. 7-9 were his granddaughters. Chandu Ram was the father of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 5, 7-9 and the husband of Chand Kaur had inherited the suit land from his father, Misri.

4. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he along with his mother, Chand Kaur

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2020 Supreme(SC) 286

L.NAGESWARA RAO, HEMANT GUPTADhanpat – AppellantVersusSheo Ram (Deceased) through LRs. – Respondent

Cases Referred (10)

L.NAGESWARA RAO, HEMANT GUPTA
Dhanpat – Appellant
Versus
Sheo Ram (Deceased) through LRs. – Respondent