Back
1973 Supreme(Raj) 11
Rajasthan High Court
Kan Singh, J.
Ramniwasi - Appellant
Versus
Madanlal - Respondents
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 109 of 1970
Decided On : January 18, 1973
Roshanlal, for Appellant; Sumer Chand, for Respondent
Headnote:Succession Act, Sec. 63—Wills—Special requirement of proof—Suspicious circumstances—Where suspicious circumstances are noticed heavy onus on propounder, benefiting from will to remove suspi-cions — It is unusual for testatrix to execute two wills at the same time—This coupled with other evidence makes the execution of will suspicious.
There is, one special requirement in relation to wills, that it shall be the duty of the propounder to remove all suspicions about the execution or dispensing state of mind of the testator. In certain events the legitimate doubt as to the mental capacity of the testator, may not be removed. Various circumstances are required to be considered, namely, dispositions made in the will appeared to be improbable or unfair in the light of relevant circumstances, or, the will may otherwise indicate that the said disposi-tiens may not be result of the testators free will and mind In such cases the Court would naturally expect that all legitimate suspicions should be completely removed before the document is accepted as the last will of the testator. The presence of such suspicious circumstances naturally tends to make the initial onus on the propounder to prove the will very heavy; and, unless it is satisfactorily discharged, the court shall be reluctant to treat the document as the last will of the testator.
Held = Where a caveat is filed alleging facts in respect of the execution of the will propounded, such facts or pleas may have to be proved by the caveator, but. even without such facts or pleas the circumstances may raise a doubt as to whether the testator was acting of his own free will in executing the will and in such circumstances it would be a part of the initial onus to remove any such mate doubts in the matter.
Held = It is understandable that after executing a certain will and on account of lapse of time the testator may have second thoughts about his or her affairs and may think of modifying what had already been written. But one rarely comes across a case where the testator right from the beginning thinks of executing two wills, keeping one will deliberately vague or wanting in some respects and then designedly executing another will to make good the so called deficiencies.
Held = Suspicions are not excited or arise from what the caveator has proved or failed to prove.They arise here on account of the inherent circumstances brought in by the propounder himself and which exist in relation to the execution of the will. Therefore, on account of these suspicions I am not satisfied that Ex. 1 or Ex. 2 were the last wills of the deceased. (Paras 18, 25 and 29)
2. Smt. Ramkanwari was a widow having no children and was aged about 80 at the time of her death on 30-12-63. She became a widow at an early age. She had two houses, which she inherited from her husband, situated in what is known as Peepli-wali Gali, Jodhpur. They are said to be worth Rs. 6000/-. She also had household effects worth Rs. 200/- or so. Also she had an account with one Sunderdas Kanhaiyalal. Rs. 1126/- were in deposit with Sunderdas Kanhaiyalal in the name of the deceased. She had to pay Rs. 380/- to one Narayandas. On an application by one Anantram the Collector of Jodhpur took proceedings in escheat in respect of the property left by deceased Ramkanwari as it was given out that Smt. Ramkanwari had died heirless. Madanlal contested the escheat proceeding and came forward with two documents alleged to be executed by the deceased in his favour and they purported to be the wills made by Ramkanwari during her life time. The Collector appointed a receiver for property of Ramkanwari and eventually directed Madanlal to obtain letters of administration of probate in respect of the wills propounded by him. It is in these circumstances that Madanlal made the application for grant of letters of administration with a copy of the wills annexed in the court of the District Judge, Jodhpur.
3. The near relations of the deceased were the sons and daughters of her brothers and one Chhaganlal who was the son of the sister of Ramkanwaris husband.
4. One brother of deceased Ramkanwari was Hariram. He had two sons Madanlal and Banslulal. Madanlal was the propounder of the wills. The other brother of the deceased Ramkanwari was Jai Narain. He had four sons Jehroji, Moolchand, Nemichand and Daulal and three daughters Smt. Joghiya, Smt. Indria and Smt. Ramniwasi. Notices were issued by the learned District Judge to these nine relatives of the deceased and one of them Smt. Ramniwasi, the appellant here, lodged a caveat. Anantram on whose information the escheat proceedings were started by the Collector, Jodhpur, had filed a caveat earlier to Smt. Ramniwasi filing the caveat, but Anantrams caveat was dismissed on the ground that he had no locus standi. The two wills (one of them was taken to be a codicil) were Ex. 1 and Ex. 2 and were said to be executed on 28-12-63 by the deceased Ramkanwari in favour of Madanlal at his house. According to Madanlal, Ramkanwari had become unwell some. 10 days prior to her death though she was still able to move about in the house as she was not so ill as to prevent her altogether from moving about. Madanlal proceeded to say that Ramkanwari had affection for him and he had been serving her and also maintaining her. Ramkanwari had stayed at his house for the last 10 days preceding her death and she expired at about 10 p. m. or so on the night between 30-12-63 and 31-12-63.
5. According to the caveator, both the wills were forged by Madanlal and his associates after the death of Ramkanwari She proceeded to say that she was a tenant of Ramkanwari in one of her two houses in Peepli-Wali Gali and Ramkanwari was hale and hearty and had been staying at her own house till her death at about 2 or 2.30 p. m. on 30-12-63. According to her, Ramkanwari had even gone to cast her vote in the Municipal elections that had taken place that day, but soon after her return she died at her house in Peepli-Wali Gali. When word was sent about her death to her relatives Madanlal accompanied by his mother and a few others came to the house of Ramkanwari and removed her dead body to his own house which was at a distance of about 200 yards from the house
