Back
ARUN BHANSALI
LRs. of Bhinya Ram – Appellant
Versus
LRs. of Takhu Ram – Respondent
The judgment discusses the importance of the petitioner entering the witness box and actively participating in the proceedings to establish the validity of the will. It emphasizes that the burden of proof lies heavily on the propounder of the will, and failure to produce the propounder or to provide satisfactory evidence can adversely affect the maintainability of the probate application. Specifically, the judgment notes that despite granting sufficient opportunities, the propounder did not appear in the witness box or examine himself, leading to an adverse inference regarding the proof of the will. This failure is considered significant because it indicates a lack of proper contest or active prosecution of the case, which can render the suit non-maintainable.
The judgment also highlights that the absence of the propounder’s explanation or evidence to dispel suspicious circumstances surrounding the will further undermines its validity, and such non-participation can be a ground for rejecting the application for probate on the basis that the suit is not properly maintained (!) (!) .
Arun Bhansali, J.
This appeal under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (‘the Act’) has been filed by the appellant – Bhinya Ram (since deceased) aggrieved against the judgment dated 21.09.1994 passed by the District Judge, Bikaner (‘the trial court’), whereby the application filed by the respondent – Takhu Ram (since deceased) under Section 276 of the Act has been allowed and probate has been ordered to be issued in favour of respondent – Takhu Ram in respect of Will dated 02.04.1979 executed by Smt. Ganga.
2. The respondent – Takhu Ram filed application under Section 276 of the Act seeking probate of Will dated 02.04.1979 executed by Smt. Ganga wife of Late Kesara Ram, resident of – Uchida, Tehsil – Loonkaransar. It was averred in the application that executant Ganga expired on 01.05.1979 at Uchida and in respect of her properties situated at Village – Netawas, she had executed a Will dated 02.04.1979 and placed her thumb impression, whereby she bequeathed her property including land admeasuring 151 Bigha, a house and five cows to the applicant; the Will was last will of the deceased; the Will was executed voluntarily and the same is duly executed, the property
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
