IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Sumit Kumar Kundu, (Madhabi Kundu since deceased) – Appellant
Versus
Subhra Kundu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of deceased's estate. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. allegations against the validity of the will. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments on suspicious circumstances of the will. (Para 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. respondents argue validity of will based on evidence. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 32) |
| 5. delay in applying for letters of administration explained. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 6. standards for proving a will and burden of proof. (Para 39 , 44) |
| 7. right to apply for probate is continuous. (Para 40 , 41) |
| 8. importance of attesting witness testimony. (Para 45 , 49 , 50) |
| 9. mutations don't negate the need for probate. (Para 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 10. final decision upholding lower court's grant. (Para 60 , 61 , 62) |
JUDGMENT :
Rajasekhar Mantha, J.
1. The appellants were the defendants in OS Suit No. 11 of 2001. They are aggrieved by the grant of letters of administration in favour of the Respondents by its judgment dated 13th March 2012, passed by the Additional District Judge, 8th Court at Alipore, South 24 Parganas.
I. FACTS OF THE CASE AND PROCEEDINGS IN THE TRIAL COURT
2. One Hridoy Krishna Kundu died in the town of Durgapur, on 31st May 1977. He was a Hindu governed by the Dayabh
H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma and Others
Kunvarjeet Singh Khandpur v. Kirandeep Kaur and Ors.
Kerala State Electricity Board v. T.P. Kunhaliumma
Krishan Kumar Sharma v. Rajesh Kumar Sharma
Paritosh Patra and Ors. v. Angur Bala Ranaand Ors.
State of Kerala v. V. R. Kalliyanikutti and Anr.
Ramesh Nivrati Bhagwat v. Dr. Surender Monohar
Murthy & Ors. v. C. Saradambal
Joyce Primrose Prestor v. Vera Marie Vas
A holographic Will is presumed valid unless strong evidence is presented to the contrary. Delays in seeking letters of administration do not invalidate the Will if the right to apply arises from lega....
(1) When a Will is allegedly shrouded in suspicion, its proof ceases to be a simple lis between plaintiff and defendant.(2) Genuineness of Will must be proved by proving intention of testator to make....
The propounder of a Will must prove its valid execution and genuine nature, failing which, the Will cannot be upheld.
The absence of an original Will does not invalidate its probate if secondary evidence sufficiently proves its execution and the delay in application is justified.
A will must be executed in accordance with statutory requirements, and any suspicious circumstances must be adequately addressed by the propounder for the will to be validated.
Important Point : A will can be proved through secondary evidence if the original is lost, and Letters of Administration can be granted when no executor is appointed.
The propounder must prove the existence and loss of the original Will to obtain Letters of Administration; reliance on a photocopy alone is insufficient.
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.