SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 598

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sandeep Kumar, J.
Vijay Kumar Singh, S/o Late Ram Briksh Singha - Petitioner
Vs.
Ram Chandra Prasad Singh S/o Late Ram Briksh Singh - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Jurisdiction No. 97 of 2022
Decided On : 18-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Md. Harun Quareshi, Advocate

The validity of a Will under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act requires a full trial if disputed facts exist, rather than being decided as a preliminary issue.

Headnote:(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 63 - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XIV Rule 2 - Validity of Will - The court set aside the dismissal of Title Suit No.39 of 2019, ruling that the issue of the Will's validity, requiring evidence, should not have been treated as a preliminary issue. The court emphasized that the presence of multiple attesting witnesses is essential for a valid Will under Section 63. (Paras 28, 27)

(B) Preliminary Issues - The court clarified that mixed questions of law and fact cannot be resolved as preliminary issues without a full trial, especially when the facts are disputed. (Paras 27, 28)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed for probate of a Will executed by his father, which was contested by his elder brother on grounds of non-compliance with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act. The trial court dismissed the suit based on a preliminary issue regarding the Will's validity.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the trial court erred in dismissing the suit without a full trial, as the validity of the Will required examination of evidence regarding attesting witnesses.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Will was valid under Section 63 and if the trial court could decide the case based on a preliminary issue.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the trial court must consider all issues and cannot dismiss a case based on a preliminary issue when facts are disputed. The requirement for attestation by two witnesses is mandatory for a valid Will.

Result: Petition allowed, orders set aside.

JUDGMENT :

The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

    "a. For setting aside the order dated 18.01.2022 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, XXI, Patna in Title Suit No.39 of 2019, whereby and whereunder Probate Case No.58 of 2018 converted into Title Suit No.39 of 2019 has been dismissed summarily on the basis of preliminary issue without correctly appreciating the law and the facts of the case and without application of judicious mind by the learned court below.

    b. For setting aside the order dated 29.11.2021 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge XXI, Patna in Title Suit No.39 of 2019 whereby and whereunder additional issue no.1(a) has been framed and inserted after original issue no.1 framed on 25.11.2019 and further it has been directed that the said issue no.1(a) be treated as preliminary issue and the parties may come prepared for hearing on the same.

    c. For issuance of appropriate order directing the court below to properly adjudicate Probate Case No.58 of 2018 converted into title Suit No.39 of 2019 filed by the petitioner after full-fledged trial in consonance with the principles of natural justice."

2. The facts of this case, as stated in the writ petition, are that the father of the petitioner late Ram Briksh Singh executed a registered Will on 04.03.2015 in favour of his son i.e. the petitioner. The father of the petitioner died on 15.08.2018 leaving behind his five sons and two daughters. As per the Will, the immovable property bequeathed to the petitioner is the self acquired property of his father, which came in exclusive title and possession of the testator after deed of gift executed in the year 1951 by the grandfather of the petitioner. Earlier, in the year 1951, the grand-father of the petitioner executed a gift deed in favour of his two sons namely Ram Briksh Singh and Ram Sagar Singh in respect to several plots including Plot No.167, Khata No.511, Thana No.14, Tauzi No.1501 situated at Mauza Pahari measuring 3 kattha and 15 dhur but Ram Sagar Singh died issue-less and therefore, the father of the petitioner became the owner of the property of Ram Sagar Singh.

3. The petitioner, after death of his father, filed Probate Case No.57 of 2018 under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate certificate in his favour by impleading all the brothers and sisters of the petitioner as parties. In the said probate case, the elder brother of the petitioner namely, Ram Chandra Prasad Singh filed his objection and sought a month's time to file his written objection. However, two brothers and two sisters of the petitioner supported the case of the petitioner by filing their show-cause and they have stated that the Will was executed well within their knowledge.

4. On 11.06.2019, the Court below directed to convert the probate case into a testamentary case in view of the objection filed by the elder brother of the petitioner. On 28.08.2019, the elder brother of the petitioner filed his written statement in the newly constituted Title Suit No.39 of 2019, in which no objection with regard to non-compliance of section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was taken. As the defendant no.5 was not appearing in the probate case in spite of repeated notice, the Court below vide order dated 15.11.2019 decided to proceed ex-parte against the non-appearing defendants. Thereafter, the Court below after hearing the parties vide order dated 25.11.2019 framed five issues for consideration, which reads as under:-

    1. Whether the suit as framed is maintainable ?

    2. Whether the plaintiff has valid cause of action for the Suit ?

    3. Whether the plaintiff has paid sufficient court fee or not ?

    4. Whether the registered will dated 04.03.2015, executed by the deceased Ram Briksh Singh in favour of the plaintiff is genuine, legal and valid or not ?

    5. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to grant probate certificate in his favour on the basis of the Will dated 04.03.2015 e

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top