IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that an absolute bequest in a Will prevails over any subsequent conflicting clauses, affirming the testator's intention as paramount.

JUDGMENT :

(Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.)

1. The present suit has been filed seeking a declaration that the plaintiff is the remainderman in respect of the suit property i.e., complete ground floor of plot no. 14, Sri Fort Road, New Delhi-110049 admeasuring 400 sq. yards along with garage and 50% of the Annexe servant quarter (‘suit property’), for all purposes in terms of the registered Will dated 15.11.2011 thereby declaring that the plaintiff has an absolute interest in the suit property.

2. In addition, the plaintiff has also sought a declaration that defendant no. 2 has no right, title or interest in the suit property and defendant no. 1 shall be bound by the terms of the registered Will dated 15.11.2011. Lastly, the plaintiff has sought a perpetual injunction, thereby, restraining the defendants from selling, alienating or parting with the possession or creating third party interest in the suit property; and restraining the defendants in engaging any act or omission against the terms of the registered Will dated 15.11.2011, which is detrimental to the vested rights and interests of the plaintiff in the suit property.

3. As stated in the plaint, the registered Will dated 15.11.2011 was executed by late Mr. Ravinder Kumar Gupta (‘Testator’), who unfortunately passed away on 06.05.2012. Plaintiff and defendant no. 2 are the children of the Testator, while defendant no. 1 is the widow of the Testator.

4. The plaintiff has relied upon the contents of the Will dated 15.11.2011 for seeking the reliefs in the plaint, wherein the relevant portion of the said Will reads as under: -

“I hereby GIVE, DEVISE AND Bequeath all my properties, moveable or immovable to my wife, Mrs. Sudershan Gupta absolutely and for ever and after her demise all my only immovable properties shall be owned by my only son, Shri Sharad Gupta and in case my wife predeceases me, my only son Shri Sharad Gupta shall own all my only immovable properties & immovable properties to my daughter Swati Gupta.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

5. The plaintiff stated that by virtue of the Will dated 15.11.2011, the testator has entrusted defendant no. 1 with life interest in the suit property and created an absolute interest in favour of the plaintiff on the demise of defendant no. 1. The relevant paragraphs of the plaint read as under: -

“13. That the Plaintiff respectfully submits before this Hon'ble Court that on bare perusal of contents of Will dated 15.11.2011, executed by Plaintiff father, it is unambiguously explicated that the Defendant No.1 only has life interest i.e., limited interest in the Suit Property, thereby restricting her right to reside, enjoy and possess the suit property during her lifetime, with no right to sell, transfer and/ or otherwise alienate the Suit Property. It is imperative to note that the will of the father of the Plaintiff explicitly delineates and elucidates by way of unriddling the fact that upon the demise of the Defendant No.1, the exclusive ownership rights of the Suit Property (immovable property), as expounded in the Will of the Father of the Plaintiff, is to be devolved upon the Plaintiff absolutely.

...

15. That the Plaintiff is absolute owner/ultimate beneficiary and remainderman of the suit property by virtue of registered will dated 15.11.2011 executed by testator, Ravinder Kumar Gupta (late father of Plaintiff) and Plaintiff has strong reasonable apprehension that Defendants in future may deny the absolute title of Plaintiff, hence, the Plaintiff hereby seeks declaration to declare Plaintiff to be the remainderman in respect of the suit property i.e. complete ground floor of Plot No 14 Siri Fort Road, New Delhi-110049, admeasuring 400 Sq Yards along with garage and 50% of the Annexe Servant Quarter, for all purpose in terms of will dated 15.11.2011 executed by testator, Ravinder Kumar Gupta and thus thereby declaring the absolute interest of Plaintiff in suit property.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

6. Learned counsel for the plaintiff referred to Section