Point of Law: A Will has to be proved like any other document; test to be applied being usual test of satisfaction of prudent mind. Alike the principles governing the proof of other documents, in case of will too, the proof with mathematical accuracy is not to be insisted upon.

JUDGMENT :

Leeladhar and Manohar Lal, minors at the relevant time, instituted a Civil Suit on 01.11.2007, through their father Narayan Singh (Narayan Dass), claiming property of their paternal uncle Het Ram on the basis of a Will dated 23.11.2005, allegedly executed by him (Het Ram) in their favour. Mutation No.75, concerning the suit property, was entered and attested on 15.03.2007 in favour of Het Ram’s widow–Himti Devi (original defendant No.2) and his daughter Kaushlya Devi (original defendant No.1). Defendant No.2 died during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned trial Court, hence, her name was struck off from the array of parties.

Both the learned Courts below have concurrently held that execution of the Will set up by the plaintiffs was shrouded with suspicious circumstances. The execution of the Will did not appeal to the conscious of the learned Courts in view of the suspicious circumstances explained in their judgments. Hence, the plaintiffs’ civil suit was dismissed by both the learned Courts below. Aggrieved, the plaintiffs have come up by means of present Regular Second Appeal against the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the learned trial Court on 22.08.2017 and by the learned First Appellate Court on 17.12.2019.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal was taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. The points emphasized by learned counsel for the appellants were that learned Courts below erred in law and fact in holding that the Will dated 23.11.2005 executed by Het Ram in favour of his nephews (appellants/plaintiffs) was shrouded with suspicion and doubts, more so, when it was a case of registered Will. Both the learned Courts did not appreciate the evidence, more particularly the statement made by Het Ram in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. where he had denied his relation with the defendants. Learned counsel prayed for allowing the appeal and for setting aside the impugned judgments and decrees. Learned counsel for the respondent/defendant defended the judgments and decrees in question and argued that neither the execution of Will by the testator in sound disposing state of mind was proved by the plaintiffs nor the suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will were cogently dispelled by them.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case with their assistance, I am not inclined to interfere with the well reasoned judgments and decrees passed by the learned Courts below on facts as well as on law. I am in agreement with the findings returned by both the learned Courts below that the execution of Will set up by the plaintiffs for claiming the property of Het Ram does not appeal to the conscious and that the alleged Will was shrouded with many suspicious and mysterious circumstances.

4. Regarding execution and proof of the Will, Hon’ble Apex Court after tracing various judicial precedents in (2021)11 SCC 209, (Kavita Kanwar Vs. Pamela Mehta & others) reiterated that Will is the testamentary document that comes into operation after the death of the testator. Section 59 of the Succession Act provides that every person of sound mind, not being a minor, may dispose of his property by Will. A Will or any portion thereof; the making of which has been caused by fraud or coercion or by such importunity that has taken away the free agency of the testator is declared to be void under Section 61 of the Succession Act. Section 62 of the Act enables the maker of the Will to make or alter the same at any time when he is competent to dispose of his property by Will. It was also observed that Section 63 of Succession Act provides for execution of the unprivileged Wills as under:-

“63 Execution of unprivileged Wills. —Every testator, not being a soldier employed in an expedition or engaged in actual warfare, or an airman so employed or engaged, or a mariner at sea, shall execute his Will according to the following rules:—

(a) The