Back
H. P. SANDESH
Sreenivasmurthy, S/o. Late Mr. Venkatappa – Appellant
Versus
Lakshmamma w/o. Omkara murthy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This second appeal is filed by defendant No.2 challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.98/2009 dated 27.11.2015 and judgment and decree passed in R.A.No.14/2016 dated 29.11.2017 questioning granting of share in favour of the plaintiffs in the suit schedule properties.
2. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiffs before the Trial Court is that, one Sri Lakkanna of L.H. Palya had two sons through his wife Lakshmamma and the first son by name Kamanna is no more. The plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are the daughters of said Kamanna and defendant No.5 is the mother of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2. Since, the defendant No.5 is not in good terms with the plaintiffs and acting detrimental to the interest of the plaintiff, she is arrayed as defendant No.5 in the suit. The defendant No.1 is the wife of late Venkatappa, the defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the sons and defendant No.4 is the daughter of late Venkatappa. The plaintiffs and defendants constitute Hindu Undivided joint family. The suit properties are the joint family properties of the plaintiffs and defendants and they are in joint possession and enjoyment of the same. The father and uncle of the plaintiffs are no more. As suc
Sections 68 of Indian Evidence Act reads as proof of execution of document required by law to be attested.
The propounder of a Will must prove its execution and attestation in accordance with law, and any suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will must be dispelled for it to be considered valid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the execution of a Will in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Succession Act and the Indian Evidence Act, and th....
The burden of proof for the validity of a Will lies with the propounders, who must meet legal requirements, including examining attesting witnesses, especially in the presence of suspicious circumsta....
Secondary evidence – Neither mere admission of a document in evidence amounts to its proof nor mere making of an exhibit of a document dispense with its proof, which is otherwise required to be done ....
The court emphasized that the burden of proof lies on the propounder of a Will, especially when suspicious circumstances exist, necessitating clear evidence of its validity.
The duty of the propounder to dispel suspicion surrounding the execution of a Will and the requirement to remove all legitimate suspicions before accepting the Will as the last will of the testator.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
