The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the sound and disposing state of the testator's mind and his signature as required by law, and the need to remove all suspicious circumstances with regard to the execution of the Will.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. The instant petition has been filed under Section 222 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate to the petitioner with respect to the registered will dated 17.9.2000 of the deceased Sh. R.N. Gupta.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The matter has arisen out of the facts as detailed hereunder:

a. Sh. R.N. Gupta, father of the petitioner died on 14th February 2006 having left behind a Will that is the subject matter of the instant petition, dated 17th September 2000 with respect to his properties at Delhi. The said Will is attached as Annexure B to the Petition.

b. Vide the said Will, the wife of testator was declared to be the beneficiary and heir of all the properties of the testator. After the death of the testator, the instant petition for probate has been filed by the son of the deceased, which is being objected to by the daughters of the deceased.

c. The main dispute qua the parties is regarding the grant of probate with respect to the undivided share of the deceased in the property of D.R. Gupta & Sons HUF (hereinafter referred to as "DRG HUF") i.e., Bungalow no.4, University Road, Delhi measuring 25750 sq. yards i.e. 5.3 acres, shares and considerable movable assets in bank accounts.

d. Petitioner/Executor is the son of the deceased and Objectors/Respondents no. 2 & 3 are the daughters of the testator.

SUBMISSIONS

3. Learned counsels for the parties have raised their contentions and submissions in writing as well as through oral submissions during the proceedings. In response to the petition, reply has been filed by the Respondents and rejoinder thereto has been filed by the Petitioner. Written Submissions have also been filed by the respondents. The entirety of the pleadings on the record have been perused and the submissions made therein by the parties are detailed hereunder:

Petitioners' Submissions

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that Shri R.N. Gupta, father of the petitioner died on 14th February 2006 having left behind a Will dated 17th September 2000 with respect to his properties at Delhi. It is submitted that the said Will is his last testament and was not changed by him at any time before his death. It is stated that the deceased had movable and immovable properties at Delhi. His close relatives included his wife, two daughters and a son who is the petitioner himself.

5. It is submitted that under the Will, late Shri R.N. Gupta has bequeathed all his moveable and immovable assets to his wife Mrs. Raj Gupta, to the exclusion of all the three children. The deceased bequeathed his one-fifth share in the HUF property 4, University Road, Delhi, which he had received upon partition of DRG HUF on 18.1.1999, to his wife Smt. Raj Gupta, and has given her absolute disposing power over the said property which included enjoying the same, selling it or gifting it.

6. It is submitted that the deceased had recorded that there was a family settlement amongst the coparceners regarding the HUF property at Bungalow no.4, University Road, Delhi. It is submitted that Memorandum of Family Settlement dated 1.4.1999 of the DRG HUF, records that there has been Partial Partition on 26.3.1977 and Oral Partition on 18.1.1999.

7. It is also submitted that the deceased has also stated in the said Will dated 17.9.2000, that in case of his wife Smt. Raj Gupta predeceasing him, then the manner in which his moveable and immovable assets will be distributed. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 through their counsel issued a notice dated 3.1.2007 calling upon the Petitioner to invalidate the Will of the deceased to the extent of his share acquired from DRG HUF.

8. It is submitted that the registered Will dated 17.9.2000 is the last Will of the deceased and all his assets have to be distributed in accordance with the same. The Petitioner as executor of the said Will is seeking the grant of Probate on the same.

Respondents' Submissions

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted t