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
JUDGMENT :
The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
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:-
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
Jagdish Chand Sharma vs. Narain Singh Saini (dead) through LRS and Ors. reported in (2015) 8 SCC 615
Nusli Neville Wadia vs. Ivory Properties & Ors. reported as (2020) 6 SCC 557
Mathew Oomen vs. Suseela Mathew reported in (2006) 1 SCC 519
Ujagar Singh vs. Charan Singh reported in AIR 1986 P&H 230
Sita Ram Vs. R.D. Gupta reported in AIR 1981 P&H 83
Bimla Devi Vs. Uma Devi reported in 2016 (4) PLJR 741
Dharam Singh vs. ASO and Anr. reported as AIR 1990 SC 1888
Seth Beni Chand (since deceased) now by L.Rs vs. Smt. Kamla Kunwar & Ors : AIR 1977 SC 63
Mathew Oommen v. Suseela Mathew; (2006) 1 SCC 519
Sh. Baldev Raj v. Sh. Man Mohan & others; (2001) 92 DLT 274
T.V.S. Rao and Anr. V. T. Kamakshiamma AIR 1978 Ori 145
Benga Bahera and Anr. Vs. Braja Kishore Nanda and Ors. reported in (2007) 9 SCC 728
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.
The execution of a will must strictly adhere to statutory requirements, including valid attestation by witnesses, and mere registration does not suffice to validate a will in the presence of suspicio....
The propounder of a will must prove due execution and attestation, particularly when suspicious circumstances exist; mere registration does not guarantee authenticity.
The courts ruled that the failure to prove the valid execution and attestation of a Will invalidates claims of property based on it, emphasizing statutory requirements for witness testimony.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the proof of execution of a registered Will requires the examination of attesting witnesses in court or their summoning under Order 16 Rule 10....
The execution of a will must comply with statutory requirements, including proper attestation by witnesses; failure to do so invalidates the will.
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.