IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI
ROBIN PHUKAN, J
On The Death Of Ram Niranjan Bawri His Legal Heirs And Rep. Ajai Bawari And Ors - Appellant
Versus
Dr. Monohar Bawri S/o Late Nandlal Bawari And Ors - Respondent
RFA 36/2017
Decided On : 19-02-2025
(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 276 - Probate of Will - The learned District Judge granted probate of the Will executed by Suti Devi Bawari on 10.02.1987, despite objections regarding its validity and execution - The court found that the Will was executed in a sound state of mind and was duly attested by witnesses - The appellants challenged the probate on grounds of limitation, suspicious circumstances, and the testatrix's right to bequeath property - The court held that the execution of the Will was established and the objections were unsubstantiated. (Paras 2 , 3 , 22 , 23 , 29 )
(B) Legal Principles - The court reiterated that the burden of proof lies on the party alleging fraud or fabrication regarding the Will - The requirements for proving a Will under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act must be strictly adhered to, including proper execution and attestation. (Paras 11 , 16 , 23 )
Facts of the case:
The respondent filed for probate of his mother's Will, executed in 1987, after her death in 1988. The appellants contested the Will's validity, claiming it was fabricated and that the testatrix lacked the right to bequeath the property.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the Will was executed properly, with witnesses confirming its validity, and that the testatrix was of sound mind.
Issues: The main issues included whether the Will was executed validly, whether the testatrix had the right to dispose of the property, and whether the execution was proven.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the Will was validly executed and that the objections raised by the appellants did not meet the burden of proof required to invalidate the Will.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. B.D. Deka, learned counsel for the appellants and also heard Mr. S.S. Sarangi, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. D. Rathi, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. In this regular first appeal, the appellants have challenged the correctness or otherwise of the judgment and order dated 13.03.2009 passed by the learned District Judge, Tinsukia, in Misc. (Probate) Case No.87/2001. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order dated 13.03.2009, the learned District Judge, Tinsukia, (Trial Court for short), had granted probate of the Will, dated 10.02.1987, executed by Suti Devi Bawari, W/o Late Nandlal Bawari.
3. The back ground facts leading to filing of the present appeal is briefly stated as under:-
Bharpur Singh & Ors. v. Shamsher Singh
N. Govindarajan v. N. Leelavathy & Ors.
Smt. Jaswant Kaur v. Smt. Amrit Kaur & Ors.
Kothi Satyanarayana v. Galla Sithayya & Ors.
Surendra Pal & Ors. v. Dr.(Mrs.) Saraswati Arora & Anr.
Kunvarjeet Singh Khandpur v. Kirandeep Kaur & Ors.
Arnab Dutta & Ors. V. Dr. Srinibash Debnath
Sameer Kapoor & Anr. v. State Through Sub-Division Magistrate South, New Delhi & Ors.
Ramesh Nivrutti Bhagwat v. Dr. Surendra Manohar Parakhe
Meena Pradhan & Ors. v. Kamla Pradhan & Anr.
H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma
Janki Narayan Bhoir v. Narayan Namdeo Kadam
Yumna Ongbi Tampha Ibema Devi v. Yumnam Joykumar Singh
The court affirmed that the execution of a Will must comply with statutory requirements, and the burden of proof lies on those alleging its invalidity.
Probate of a Will requires strict compliance with statutory formalities, including attestation by witnesses; failure to provide adequate proof leads to dismissal of the application.
The court found that the application for probate was barred by limitation, and the alleged Will was not duly executed, failing to meet statutory requirements.
The right to apply for probate is continuous, and the burden of proof lies on the propounder to establish the Will's validity and genuineness, which was satisfied in this case.
The validity of a will requires proof of execution while the testator is of sound mind, and suspicious circumstances necessitate thorough scrutiny.
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.
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.