Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR, BENCH AT NAGPUR
M.W.CHANDWANI
Ramrao, s/o. Tulshiram Mansute – Appellant
Versus
Omprakash Tulshiram Mansute – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.W. CHANDWANI, J.
This appeal challenges the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Akot passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.177 of 2005, whereby the first appellate Court overturned the decree of dismissal and allowed the appeal of the respondent declaring him as the owner of the suit property on the basis of will-deed dated 03.05.1996.
2. By the order dated 18.08.2006, the following substantial questions of law came to be framed :
“(A) That considering the various suspicious circumstances on record as regards execution of the will dated 30.05.1996 (Exh.86) such as :
a) Age of the testator being 80 years,
b) Physical condition of the testator not being good,
c) Signatures of the testator were differing from each other on Exh.86,
d) Exclusion of all other sons/relatives from the bequest especially when the testator had executed a will previously in the year 1993 and
f) Material discrepancies in the evidence of the attesting witnesses as regards execution and registration of the will, was the lower Appellate Court correct in holding that the will at Exh.86 had been duly proved by the plaintiff is the substantial question of law that arises in the present Seco
The court emphasized that the burden of proving the validity of a will lies with the propounder, who must dispel any suspicions surrounding its execution, in accordance with Section 68 of the Indian ....
The burden of proof for the validity of a Will lies with the propounder, who must dispel any doubts regarding its execution, especially in the presence of suspicious circumstances.
Proof of execution of Will – There can be no interference to Will which stands proved unequivocally.
The burden to disprove a Will lies with contesting parties after the propounder meets initial proof requirements; mere non-registration or signature comparison is insufficient to establish suspicious....
The mere presence of beneficiaries during will execution is not sufficient to invalidate it; the burden of proving suspicious circumstances lies with the challengers.
Proper execution and attestation of a will must conform to statutory requirements; suspicion surrounding its authenticity must be adequately dispelled by the propounder.
The validity of a Will requires clear evidence of revocation of prior Wills and the testator's mental fitness at execution; suspicious circumstances must be adequately addressed.
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.
Section 68 of Indian Evidence Act reads as proof of execution of document required by law to be attested.
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
