Back
2011 Supreme(Del) 166
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Mool Chand Garg, J.
Appellants: Shyam Mohan Gupta and Ors
Vs.
Respondent: Brij Mohan Gupta thr. L.Rs. and Ors.
FAO 439/2008
Decided On: 11.02.2011
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/plaintiff: Vinay Kr. Garg and Fazal Ahmad, Advs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the burden of proof in establishing the genuineness of a Will and the requirements for proving the execution of a Will under Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act.
Headnote:
Will - Probate - Indian Succession Act - [Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act] - The court analyzed the suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of the Will and the legal requirements for proving the Will. The court found that the propounders of the Will had proved the execution of the Will and the sound disposing state of mind of the testatrix. The court also considered the objections raised by the respondents and the explanations provided by the propounders. The court reversed the findings of the lower court and allowed the appeal, holding that the propounders are entitled to grant of letters of administration of the Will.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal was filed by the propounders of a Will dated 09.12.1994, seeking probate. The deceased testatrix left behind the appellants and the respondents as her legal heirs. The respondents filed objections against the grant of probate, raising concerns about the genuineness of the Will and the mental capacity of the testatrix at the time of execution.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the propounders had proved the execution of the Will and the sound disposing state of mind of the testatrix. The court also considered the objections raised by the respondents and the explanations provided by the propounders. The court reversed the findings of the lower court and allowed the appeal, holding that the propounders are entitled to grant of letters of administration of the Will.
Issues: The issues included the genuineness of the Will and the mental capacity of the testatrix at the time of execution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the propounders had discharged their burden of proving the execution of the Will and the sound disposing state of mind of the testatrix. The court also considered the explanations provided by the propounders and the objections raised by the respondents. The court applied Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act and relevant case law to determine the genuineness of the Will.
Final Decision: The court reversed the findings of the lower court and allowed the appeal, holding that the propounders are entitled to grant of letters of administration of the Will.
Mool Chand Garg, J.
CM No. 17926/2008
1. Since the LRs of the deceased Respondent No. 1 were duly served and the counsel appeared on their behalf, the application stands disposed of.
2. It is, however, noted that nobody is appearing on behalf of the Respondents since 22.09.2009. The Respondents seem to have lost interest in the matter.
FAO No. 439/2008
1. This appeal has been filed by the propounders of the Will dated 09.12.1994 which was registered before the Sub-Registrar on 13.12.1994 alleged to have been executed by Late Smt. Rukmani Devi, the testatrix thereby bequeathing her house bearing No. 3014, Masjid Khazoor, Kinari Bazaar, Delhi in favour of the Appellants. However, the learned ADJ vide order dated 01.09.2008 dismissed the probate petition registered as P.C. No. 162/2006.
2. Briefly stating the facts giving rise to filing of this case are that the deceased testatrix Smt. Rukmani Devi left behind herself the Appellants as well as the Respondents as her legal heirs. While Respondents No. 2 to 6 are sons and daughters of the deceased, Appellants No. 2 to 4 and Respondents No. 1(a) to 1(f) are the grand children of the deceased testatrix. Respondents No. 4 to 6 are the married daughters of the deceased testatrix.
3. Smt. Rukmani Devi was carrying on the business left by her deceased husband in the name and style of M/s Regal Book Depot. After the death of her husband on 16.12.1992, Smt. Rukmani Devi relinquished all her rights in the business of her husband in favour of her three sons Sh. Brij Mohan Gupta, Sh. Madan Mohan Gupta and Sh. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal (R-1 to 3.). Nothing was given to other sons, namely, Sh. Shyam Mohan Gupta and Sh. Kishan Mohan Aggarwal (Appellants).
4. However, the Appellants claim to have succeeded to the house of Smt. Rukmani Devi by virtue of the Will in question executed by Smt. Rukmani Devi whereby they have become the beneficiaries of the Will with respect to house bearing No. 3014, Masjid Khazoor, Kinari Bazaar, Delhi.
5. The Appellant filed probate case for seeking letters of administration with respect to the Will left by the deceased before the District Judge, Delhi. Respondents filed objections against the grant of probate. They took following objections:
a) That Smt. Rukmani Devi was not having any independent source of income. In fact her husband late Ram Chandra Gupta was the karta of HUF comprising of himself and his five sons and whatever he inherited from his father was invested in the business and from the income of the said business, the property in dispute was purchased. Hence the property was not the self acquired of Smt. Rukmani Devi and she was not competent to execute the Will.
b) Smt. Rukmani Devi was not keeping good health, she had bad eye sight and her mental faculties were also not good enough to take any decision and thus, the Will has not been executed with sound disposing mind.
c) The Will alleged to be executed on 09.12.1994 was in fact executed on 13.12.1994.
d) Both the attesting witness of the Will were friends and acquaintances of the beneficiaries of the Will.
e) Smt. Rukmani Devi had cordial relations with all her sons and there was no reason of her excluding the other sons from inheriting her property. She herself allowed her three sons to jointly occupy shop of her husband and the other sons were left out because they were in service and were doing business.
6. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Ld. ADJ vide order dated 17.03.1999:
1. Whether the Will dated 09.12.1994 propounded by the Petitioner is the last Will and testament of deceased Smt. Rukmani Devi and it has been executed by her in sound disposing mind and it is a valid Will?
2. Relief?
7. To prove issue No. 1, Appellants examined PW-1, Sh. Satish Chand Sharma, who is also the scribe of the Will in question, PW.2. Sh. A. Rehman, UDC from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Kashmere Gate, to prove registration of the Will registered on 13.12.1994. The next witness was PW-3 Sh
