SANJAY KAROL, JOYMALYA BAGCHI
Gurdial Singh (Dead) Through Lr – Appellant
Versus
Jagir Kaur (Dead) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Joymalya Bagchi, J.
1. The appeals are directed against the common judgment and decree dated 13.11.2009 passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in R.S.A. No.837 of 1996 and R.S.A. No.958 of 1996 setting aside the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, and declaring the 1st respondent as the owner and in possession of the suit land.
Facts
2. One Maya Singh was owner of land measuring 67 kanals 4 marlas in village Sathiala1[Hereinafter referred to as “the suit land”.]. Appellant is the nephew of Maya Singh. 1st respondent is Maya Singh’s wife. Gurpal Singh (hereinafter referred to as 2nd respondent) claimed to be the adopted son of Maya Singh and 1st respondent. Maya Singh died on 10.11.1991. On 27.10.1992, the suit land was mutated in favour of 1st respondent. Apprehending that 1st respondent was taking steps to alienate the property, appellant filed a Suit RBT No. 329/1992 by propounding a Will executed by Maya Singh on 16.05.1991, bequeathing the land to him. In this suit, appellant contended his uncle, Maya Singh was married to one Joginder Kaur who had predeceased him and 1st respondent was not his lawfully wedded wife or 2nd respondent,
Smt. Jaswant Kaur v. Smt. Amrit Kaur and others
H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs. B.N. Thimmajamma & Ors.
Indu Bala Bose & Ors. vs. Manindra Chandra Bose & Anr.
PPK Gopalan Nambier vs. PPK Balakrishnan Nambiar & Ors.
Will – When suspicious circumstances exist and have not been repelled to satisfaction of Court, Court would not be justified in holding that Will is genuine since signatures have been duly proved and....
The propounder of a Will must dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution to establish its validity.
Precise compliance with statutory execution and proof requirements for Wills is necessary, especially when involving Pardanashin individuals; the burden of proof lies on those asserting the validity ....
A propounder of a Will must dispel any suspicious circumstances regarding its execution; failure to do so results in denial of probate or Letters of Administration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the fulfillment of legal requirements for proving a Will and the production of sufficient evidence to remove suspicious circumstances, thereby upho....
The mere presence of beneficiaries during will execution is not sufficient to invalidate it; the burden of proving suspicious circumstances lies with the challengers.
Proving the execution of a Will does not establish its validity if it is surrounded by suspicious circumstances. The beneficiary must satisfy the Court that there are no suspicious circumstances or e....
The propounder of a Will must dispel any existing suspicious circumstances regarding its validity for it to be accepted by the court.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.