A will is valid if duly executed, even without attesting witnesses, provided other credible evidence supports its authenticity, with the burden on challengers to prove undue influence or coercion.

JUDGMENT :

Sugato Majumdar, J.

1.The instant suit is for grant of probate of the last will and testament of the deceased Sita Devi Bazaz.

2. The deceased Sita Devi Bazaz was a Hindu who had her last abode at 378, Block-G, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053. She breathed her last on 20^th January, 2013 at her place of residence. Prior to her death, she executed her last will and testament on 8^th December, 2005 in English language. The will was duly registered. The Testatrix left behind her son and daughter. The present Petitioner being Executor, is the grandson of the Testatrix.

3. On death of the Testatrix, the instant application was filed, praying for grant of probate of the last will and testament of the Testatrix.

4. General and special citations were issued to the son and daughter of the Testatrix. The daughter of the Testatrix Smt. Rani Goenka lodged caveat as well as affidavit of support of caveat. The caveat was allowed and the affidavit was treated as written statement.

5. The contents of the written statement may be summarized as follow:

a) It was contended that the will is unnatural, improbable and unfair, inasmuch as all the heirs and heiresses of the deceased are not included. The Defendant is the only daughter of the Testatrix and she had high respect for and faith on her mother. Relationship between herself and the Testatrix was very cordial. She used to visit her mother’s home very frequently till death. At no point of time the Testatrix or the brother of the present Defendant or any of his family members informed or disclosed to the Defendant that the instant will had been executed by the Testatrix. The Defendant has no curiosity about the properties which had been acquired by the Testatrix during her life time. 10 to 12 years prior to her death, at the age of 82, the Testatrix had been suffering from amnesia. Before her death, she used to tell the Defendant that all her properties including jewelleris would be divided between the Defendant and her brother, being the son of the Testatrix. The ornaments of the Testatrix are not disclosed in the affidavit of assets.

b) According to the Defendant, the Executor of the will is the grandson of the Testatrix. In the circumstances, it raises a reasonable doubt about genuineness of the will and gave rise to a suspicious circumstance surrounding execution of the will. The Executor is in ploy to grab the entire properties of the Testatrix, as alleged. The alleged will was prepared under suspicious circumstances.

c) The alleged will was not properly executed, according to the Defendant. Bimal Kumar Bazaz who was the biological son of the Testatrix was subsequently adopted by the brother-in- law of the Testatrix. It is alleged that will was procured under coercion or undue influence and by exercise of force; all these were done by Rajkumar Bazaz, his son Atul Kumar Bazaz, Bimal Kumar Bazaz and other family members of Rajkumar Bazaz.

d) Both the attesting witnesses are dead. Bimal Kumar Bazaz filed a declaration and affidavit before this Court. The propounder also admitted that he along with Bimal Kumar Bazaz were present at the time of execution of the will. It is contended in the written statement that the Testatrix was a house wife and Pardanasin lady who could not have made or executed any document including any will of her own. When the will was executed she was about 80 years. From the execution to attestation of the alleged will of the deceased, as pleaded, it is crystal clear that