Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.A. Nakkiran, J.
Tmt. N. Pushpa - Appellant
Vs.
Selvi R.Vimala - Respondent
T.O.S.No.1 of 2021 (O.P.No.755 of 2014)
Decided On : 01-04-2025
(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 63 - Testamentary Original Suit for grant of Letters of Administration with Will dated 22.08.2002 - Plaintiffs claimed to be beneficiaries under the Will of deceased, while defendants contested its validity citing fabrication and lack of registration - Court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the genuineness of the Will due to suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution and delay in filing the suit. (Paras 5, 20)
(B) Evidence - Burden of proof lies on the party propounding the Will to establish its validity - The court noted that the plaintiffs did not adequately address the absence of the first attesting witness and the suspicious nature of the Will's execution. (Paras 10, 16)
Facts of the case:
The plaintiffs sought Letters of Administration for a Will executed by the deceased, claiming to be the only beneficiaries, while the defendants, being the deceased's daughters, contested the Will's authenticity, alleging it was fabricated and not executed in accordance with legal requirements.
Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to prove the Will's authenticity, citing suspicious circumstances and the long delay in filing the suit, leading to the dismissal of the Testamentary Original Suit.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the Will dated 22.08.2002 was genuine and valid. The court examined the evidence presented by both parties regarding the execution and attestation of the Will.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the plaintiffs did not meet the burden of proof required to establish the Will's validity, noting the suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution and the lack of timely action to probate the Will. The court emphasized the importance of producing attesting witnesses and addressing any discrepancies in the Will's execution.
Result: The Testamentary Original Suit is dismissed. No costs.
JUDGMENT :
A.A. Nakkiran, J.
Testamentary Original Suit is filed for grant of Letters of Administration with the Will dated 22.08.2002 to the 1st petitioner as brother's wife and 2nd petitioner as a nephew/legatee under the Will of the deceased Mr.T.D.Ranganathan.
2.The case of the Plaintiffs, as set out, in TOS is as follows:
a) The deceased Testator ie.Mr.T.D.Ranganathan, executed his Last Will and Testament on 22.08.2002 at Chennai in the presence of witnesses. Mr.T.D.Ranganathan died at Chennai on 28.05.2006 leaving behind his wife, his sons 1. T.R.Srinivasan, 2.T.R.Murali, 3. T.R.Balaji and 4. T.R.Giri. They are also aware of the Will and all of them are witnesses to the above Will and they have no claim whatsoever to the Willed property. The parents of the deceased pre-deceased him and the wife of the deceased died on 25.02.2010.
b)The petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased Narasimhan who is the beneficiary under the Will. Narasimhan died on 05.12.2006. There is no executor named in the Will. The petitioners are the only beneficiary/legatees under the said Will, unless letters of administration is issued to the Will, they could not claim any right on the basis of the Will. The 1st petitioner is able to identify the signature of the testator. The 2nd attester of the Will also died. Since the necessity arises to dispose of the property, the delay is caused and may be condoned. The value and amounts of assets that are likely to come into the hands of petitioners hand does not exceed in the aggregate the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and the net amount of the said assets after deducting all items which the plaintiffs by law allowed to deduct is only of the value of Rs.3,00,000/-. The petitioners undertake to duly administer the property and credits of the said T.D.Ranganathan deceased in any way concerning his Will by paying first his debts and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the Will extended and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same in this Court within six months from the date of grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed to the petitioner.
c)The plaintiffs have not made any application to any District or delegate or to any other High Court for probate or Letters of Administration with or without Will on his property and credits. The petitioners have impleaded all next of kin or other persons interested as party respondent all the heir and next of the deceased are arranged as respondents in this petition. Hence, this suit.
3. The averment of written statement filed by the defendants 1 and 2 are as follows:
a) These defendants are daughters of Late T.D.Ranganathan. They are the co-owners of the property situate at Door No.6, Old Door No.20, Mohammed Abdullah Sahib, 2nd Street, Chepauk, Triplicane, Chennai-5. The property pertaining to the Will was purchased by their father late T.D.Ranganathan and his younger brother T.D.Narashiman through a registered sale deed dated 24.06.1970. These defendants, being unmarried, unemployed and have no source of income and during the life time of their father, were completely dependent on him and after his death, they were being taken care of by their brothers/defendants 6,7 and 8 and they have been living in joint family with their paternal uncle T.D.Narashiman. T.D.Narashiman died in the same year 2006. After the marriage of defendant's brothers, the defendants 1 and 2 and their brothers all moved out of the said property and they are residing under the care of their brothers. As the plaintiffs have not come forward for amicable partition, they took legal action against the plaintiffs and on obtaining encumbrance certificate for the said property, it came to know that the plaintiffs have surreptitiously alienated the said property to some third parties through three different sale deeds dated 21.04.2017. The plaintiffs have no right to deal with the share of the defendants in the said property which they inherited from their deceased father,
The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to prove the genuineness of the Will due to suspicious circumstances and inadequate evidence, leading to the dismissal of the Testamentary Original Suit.
The court held the burden of proof lies on the propounder of a will to dispel suspicions surrounding its execution; failure to establish genuineness results in dismissal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the fulfillment of statutory requirements for proving the authenticity of a Will, including the mental capacity of the testator and the testimony o....
The validity of a will must be proved by clear evidence, including testimony from attesting witnesses; failure to do so, alongside suspicious circumstances, results in dismissal of testamentary claim....
The court affirmed the validity of the Will executed by the deceased, ruling that it was genuine and not executed under undue influence, thus granting Letters of Administration to the plaintiff.
A registered Will is presumed genuine unless serious doubts about its execution or the testatrix's capacity are proven.
(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....
The failure to meet the statutory requirements for proving a Will under Section 68 of the Evidence Act leads to its invalidity, resulting in intestate succession applying instead.
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 court upheld the validity of a Will executed by the deceased, affirming that it was made in a sound state of mind and properly attested, thus granting Letters of Administration to the plaintiffs.
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
