Back
TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE
Manjula Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
Anjan Ghosh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. probate granted based on a will's validity. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appeal against probate highlights procedural errors. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. requirements for proving a will outlined. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. definition of suspicious circumstances in wills. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. witness credibility and evidence reliability assessed. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. contentions regarding undue influence need evidence. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. court discretion in evidence related to handwriting. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. holograph will executed without suspicion affirmed. (Para 22) |
| 9. appeal dismissed; judgment affirmed. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, J.
1. Judgment dated 19.04.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, North 24 Parganas, Barasat in O.S. No. 32 of 2006, whereby direction was given to grant probate in respect of the last Will and testament executed by the testator on 12.05.1986, has been called in question in the present appeal.
2. Facts giving rise to this appeal, in brief, are follows:
The propounder of a Will must prove valid execution by confirming compliance with legal requirements, and any allegations of forgery or mental incapacity must be substantiated by the contesting party....
The validity of a Will is upheld when properly executed, and the burden of proving undue influence or fraud lies with objectors, not the propounder.
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
