IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT AT GUWAHATI (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Smti. Geetanjali Das, W/o Late Golap Das – Appellant
Versus
Rina Das, W/o Late Golap Das – Respondents
Testamentary Case No. 8 of 2016
Decided on : 23-09-2024
Succession - Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 63, 68 - The court emphasized the necessity of strict compliance with the formalities for executing a will, including attestation by witnesses and the absence of suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, which influenced the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant sought Letters of Administration for a will executed by the deceased, which was contested by the legal heirs on grounds of the appellant's marital status and the will's validity.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the execution of the will was surrounded by suspicious circumstances, and the appellant failed to dispel these suspicions, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: The main issues included the maintainability of the petition for Letters of Administration, the legal status of the appellant as the deceased's wife, and the validity of the will.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the burden of proof lies on the propounder of the will to remove any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, which the appellant failed to do.
Result: The appeal is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This appeal, under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.07.2014, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Title Suit No. 47/2007.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order dated 30.07.2014, the learned Additional District Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur has dismissed the suit, being Title Suit No. 47/2007, filed by the petitioner for granting of Letter of Administration on the last will of deceased Golap Das.
Background Facts:-
4. The background facts, leading to filing of the present appeal, are adumbrated herein below:-
After the death of Golap Das, the present appellant had filed an application before the learned trial court for grant of Letters of Administration of the said will, in her favour, under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act. Thereafter, the opposite parties, namely, Smti Rina Das, Sri Uttam Das, Smti Rimpi Das and Sri Aditya Das had filed a joint written statement whereby they had stated that Smti Rina Das is the legally married wife of the deceased Golap Das since long as per Hindu Marriage Act and other parties are legitimate sons and daughter of the deceased and during the lifetime of Rina Das, the deceased cannot marry any other women and the appellant not being the legally married wife could not claim to be the ‘wife’ of deceased Golap Das and on such count, the application for issuing letters of administration is not maintainable.
The opposite parties/respondents also stated that the petitioner/appellant had filed another proceeding, being Misc. (S/C) Case No. 13/2007 for grant of Succession Certificate in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased Golap Das, wherein the appellant had stated that she got married to Golap Das on 04.02.2004, and the same was during the lifetime of legally married wife of the deceased Smti. Rina Das, and under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, performance of such marriage is not legally valid. Further, the respondents had denied of execution of any will or testament on 03.03.2004, in favour of the appellant bequeathing any of his debts and securities, estates and effects by Late Golap Das.
Thereafter, considering the pleadings and hearing both sides, the learned trial court had framed the following issues :-
1. Whether the petition for grant of Letters of Administration with the purported WILL annexed is maintainable ?
2. Whether petitioner Smti. Gitanjali Das is the legally married wife of the deceased Golap Das ?
3. Whether the petitioner is a lawful heir of the deceased Golap Das ?
4. Whether the deceased Golap Das lawfully executed any last WILL dated 03.03.04 bequeathing his estates to the petitioner ?
5. Whether the purported WILL dated 03.03.04 is sham, forged, fraudulent, and inoperative and unconsciousable ?
6. Whether the purported WILL has made in serious circumstances with coercion and undue influence while Golap Das was leading adulterous life with the petitioner?
7. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the grant of Letters of Administration with any WILL annexed in respect of all the estates of the deceased?
Thereafter, hearing both the parties, the le
H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma
Ishwardeo Narayan Singh vs. Smti. Kamta Devi and Others
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.
The court reaffirmed that a will must be executed in compliance with statutory requirements, and any suspicion regarding its validity must be adequately addressed by the propounder.
The execution and integrity of a Will can be upheld despite minor discrepancies or the presence of the beneficiary at signing, provided proper attesting witnesses confirm its authenticity.
The propounders have the onus to prove due execution of a Will as per the requirements of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. When there are suspicious circumstances, a greater onus lies o....
The propounder of a Will must prove its execution and validity, and the presence of suspicious circumstances must be specifically pleaded by the opposing party to shift the burden of proof.
The mere presence of beneficiaries during will execution is not sufficient to invalidate it; the burden of proving suspicious circumstances lies with the challengers.
Precise compliance with statutory execution and proof requirements for Wills is necessary, especially when involving Pardanashin individuals; the burden of proof lies on those asserting the validity ....
The propounder of a Will must prove its valid execution and genuine nature, failing which, the Will cannot be upheld.
(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....
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.