The duty of the propounder to remove suspicious circumstances and prove the genuineness of the will, the relevance of expert reports, and the applicability of specific sections of the Indian Succession Act and the Evidence Act in determining the validity of the will.

1. This is an application for probate filed by the executor to the will and testament dated 4th February, 1997 purportedly executed by Paramesh Chandra Sen, who died on 23rd September, 1985. Admittedly, the executor is residing in United Kingdom and filed the said application for probate in 2005. The facts stated in the said application are that the said Paramesh Sen, since deceased was a Hindu governed by Daybhanga school of Hindu Law and was a permanent resident of premises no. 29, Ballygung Place, Kolkata – 700 019. The testator died on 23rd September, 1985 at his residence within the jurisdiction of the State of West Bengal. The said testator executed his last will and testament on 4th February, 1979 bequeathing his half share in the said residential property to his wife Kalindi Sen for her life and on her death the same would devolve upon the executor absolutely and the other half share to the executor. The testator appointed the wife as sole executrix to obtain the probate of the said will without furnishing any security and to administer the estate in terms of the said will. The will further provides that in the event the said executrix predeceases the testator or is not willing to act as an executor, the present executor, the only son, is appointed as such and be entitled to take the probate of the will without furnishing any security.

2. The will was duly attested by three witnesses who also died before filing the application for probate. The learned Advocate who drafted the will is also no longer surviving. It is stated in the said petition that the mother namely Kalindi Sen died intested on 13th November, 2004 and after getting such information the executor came to Kolkata and performed the rituals. The executor could detect the purported will dated 4th February, 1979 from the almirah of the mother which was opened after her death and came to know of the fact that the father bequeathed the residential property to the executor to the exclusion of the other heirs.

3. Admittedly, the testator left behind him surviving at the time of his death, the widow namely Kalindi Sen, the only son, the executor herein and two daughters namely Debjani Sen and Sanjukta Mukherjee, the objectors. It is stated in the said petition that the signature of the testator is known to him and the signatures appearing in each page of the said will bear the signature of his father. The Affidavit of Assets annexed to the application for probate basically includes the said residential house with the meagre cash and other household goods, books, furniture and jewellery valuing at Rs. 15,000/-.

4. Both the objectors being the daughters of the said testator lodged a caveat with an intent to oppose the grant of probate of the purported will and also filed their respective affidavits in support thereof. The quintessence of the said objectors are that their father namely Paramesh Chandra Sen, the testator died intested on 23rd September, 1985 leaving behind him surviving the widow, two daughters and a son and therefore his estate devolve upon them by virtue of intested succession.

5. According to them, they inherited undivided 1/4th share in respect of the immovable and movable assets left by the testator and upon the death of their mother, who died intested, they became entitled to undivided 1/3rd share therein. It is further stated that the residential house is a two storied building and the ground floor therein was occupied by the tenant. The testator with his family all along resided on the first floor of the said premises and one of them namely Smt. Debjani Sen resided with them since 1966 until the later part of 2004. Even after the death of the testator, the mother and the said sister resided on the first floor and the executor used to occasionally visit them and resided therein. In order to avoid any dispute that may arise in the future it was settled in presence of the mother that the rent from the tenants of the ground floor would be rel