Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
SURENDER RANA - Appellant
Versus
STATE AND ORS. - Respondents
FAO No. 55 of 2008
Decided On : 21-08-2017
Indian Succession Act - Will - Section 299 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 114(e), Section 276(1)(c), Section 71, Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Fact of the Case:
The appeal challenges the grant of letters of administration of a Will dated 19.9.2000. The deceased testator's son and widow were the beneficiaries. The trial court found the Will to be duly executed and attested, and the deceased to be of sound mind at the time of making the Will.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court found the Will to be duly executed and attested, and the deceased to be of sound mind at the time of making the Will. Procedural non-compliance was deemed immaterial as the depositions of witnesses rectified the deficiency. The court rejected arguments of discrepancies in dates and active participation of the beneficiary in making the Will.
Issues: Validity of the Will, compliance with procedural requirements, discrepancies in dates, and beneficiary's participation in making the Will.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of rectifying procedural deficiencies through witness depositions. It also considered the presumption of proper performance of official acts and the balance of probabilities in civil cases. The court rejected arguments of discrepancies in dates and beneficiary's active participation as insufficient to invalidate the Will.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the trial court's decision to grant letters of administration of the Will.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
1. This first appeal is filed under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 22.10.2007 by which the trial court has granted to the respondent no.2 herein, petitioner in the trial court, letters of administration of the Will dated 19.9.2000 executed by Sh. Nand Lal, the father.
2. The facts of the case as pleaded in the petition in the trial court, filed by the respondent no.2/Sh. Sanjay Rana, were that his father Sh. Nand Lal died on 20.1.2001. Sh. Nand Lal had prior to his death left behind his Will dated 19.9.2000 and which was duly registered with the Sub-Registrar. By the Will the deceased testator bequeathed his property bearing no. 4249-51, Tail Mandi, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi to his one son i.e the respondent no. 2 herein and his widow Smt. Nirmal Rana. The petition in the trial court was originally filed by Smt. Nirmal Rana widow of Sh. Nand Lal along with Sh. Sanjay Rana, the son of Sh. Nand Lal, however after the death of Smt. Nirmal Rana, she was deleted from the array of the two petitioners because by the subject Will the property was bequeathed half to the widow Smt. Nirmal Rana and half to the son Sh. Sanjay Rana with the half belonging to the mother also falling to Sh. Sanjay Rana on the death of Smt. Nirmal Rana. The testator Sh. Nand Lal at the time of his death left behind his widow Smt. Nirmal Rana and one son the petitioner in the court below Sh. Sanjay Rana (respondent no.2 herein), two more sons Sh. Surender Rana (appellant herein), Sh. Navin Rana (one other objector who has chosen not to file the appeal against dismissal of his objections and granting letters of administration) and one daughter Smt. Hema Chadha (respondent no.3 in the court below and who gave her no objection to the grant of probate/letters of administration in favour of two petitioners Smt. Nirmal Rana and Sh. Sanjay Rana). Therefore, on the one side were the widow, one son and one daughter of the deceased testator Sh. Nand Lal and on the other side were two other sons who had filed objections against the subject Will.
3. To prove the Will the petitioners in the court below led evidence of six witnesses. PW-1 was the petitioner no.1 Sh. Sanjay Rana being the respondent no.2 herein. PW-2 was Sh. Rajesh Rana one of the attesting witness to the Will. PW-3 was Sh. A. Rehman, a UDC from the office of the Sub-Registrar to prove the registration of the Will. PW-4 was Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav from RBTB Hospital to show that the deceased Sh. Nand Lal had been discharged for a few hours from the hospital on 21.9.2000. PW-5 Smt. Kanta Chadha and PW-6 Smt. Bimla Mehta were the two sisters of the deceased testator Sh. Nand Lal.
4. Both the objectors being the appellant/Sh. Surender Rana and the respondent no.3 herein Sh. Navin Rana stepped into the witness box to prove their objections, however, they did not lead any evidence of any independent third party witness.
5. Trial court has held that the subject Will was proved as it was duly executed and attested by the deceased testator Sh. Nand Lal and two attesting witnesses. For holding that the subject Will has to be accepted, the trial court has given the following reasoning, and which I adopt and agree with :-
(i) The Will was duly proved to have been executed and attested, both by the deposition of the attesting witness Sh. Rajesh Rana who deposed as PW-2, and also by the deposition of the petitioner no.1 in the trial court Sh. Sanjay Rana as PW-1. These two witnesses deposed and proved the execution and attestation of the Will being signed by the testator in presence of the attesting witnesses and the attesting witnesses signing in the presence of the deceased testator.
(ii) The deceased testator Sh. Nand Lal was of sound disposing mind although the deceased testator was suffering from TB as also Asthama inasmuch as these diseases which the deceased testator was suffering from were not diseases of the mind and the evidence wa
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
