PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Shamsher Bahadur, J.
Chhanga Singh Indar Singh
Versus
Dharam Singh
Second Appeal No. 1275 of 1957,
Decided On : AUGUST 11, 1964
WILL - EXECUTION - VALIDITY - TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY - ILLNESS OF TESTATOR - EVIDENCE OF ATTESTING WITNESSES - DISCORDANT STATEMENTS - EVALUATION.
Fact of the Case:
Raj Kaur, the widow of Udham Singh, executed a will bequeathing her entire property to her nephews, Chhanga Singh and Mehar Singh, who had assisted her in litigation to regain possession of lands belonging to her son. The validity of the will was challenged by the respondents, who claimed to be the legal heirs of Udham Singh. The District Judge held that the appellants did not have the locus standi to file the appeal as they had not obtained probate or letters of administration for the will.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the will was validly executed and that the appellants had the locus standi to file the appeal. The Court found that the testatrix was in sound disposing mind at the time of execution, despite her ill health, and that the will was a natural document reflecting her true intentions. The Court also found that the discrepancies in the statements of the attesting witnesses were not sufficient to invalidate the will.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellants had the locus standi to file the appeal without obtaining probate or letters of administration for the will. 2. Whether the will was validly executed and the testatrix had the testamentary capacity to make the will.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the appellants had the locus standi to file the appeal, relying on the decision of the Division Bench in Mst. Ashrafi V/s. Tirlok Chand, AIR 1965 Punj 140, which held that a will can be admitted to probate without probate or letters of administration being attached to it. 2. The Court held that the will was validly executed and the testatrix had the testamentary capacity to make the will, relying on the evidence of the attesting witnesses and the surrounding circumstances. The Court found that the testatrix was in sound disposing mind at the time of execution, despite her ill health, and that the will was a natural document reflecting her true intentions. The Court also found that the discrepancies in the statements of the attesting witnesses were not sufficient to invalidate the will.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the case was remanded to the appellate Judge for disposal on merits.
1. The suit and land measuring 238 kanals and 7 marlas was at one time in occupation of Udham Singh as an occupancy tenant. On the death of Udham Singh, his two widows Jai Kaur and Harbans Kaur came into possession of the suit land. The two widows died in succession on 14th April, 1946 and 27th January, 1951, respectively. On the death of the second widow Harbans Kaur, Raj Kaur, mother of Udham Singh, claimed to succeed under section 59(c) of the Punjab Tenancy Act and the revenue authorities mutated one half of the land in occupation of Udham Singh as an occupancy tenant in favour of Raj Kaur and the other half in favour of Raj Kaur and the other half in favour of the respondents Dharam Singh and Bachan Singh, who are fourth degree collaterals of Udham Singh. Raj Kaur claiming succession to the entire land brought a suit for possession in 1955 but the trial Court maintained the mutation by which she was given one-half share. The decree was passed on 21st of June, 1956, only for one-half of the land of Udham Singh and the suit was dismissed in respect of the remainder. In fact, this decision was based on admissions made by parties at the time of mutation. Raj Kaur died on 23rd of July, 1956, after the decree of the trial Court. Chhanga Singh and Mehar Singh nephews of Raj Kaur, field an appeal claiming to succeed to the property of Raj Kaur as legatees under a will executed in their favour on 18th of June, 1956. Before the learned District Judge, the validity of the will was challenged by the respondents and the following issue was framed by him:
"Are the petitioners appellants the legal representatives of Mst. Raj Kaur deceased plaintiff and as such have a locus stand to institute the appeal?"
2. A preliminary objection was taken by Mr. Mittal that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Hem Nolini Judah V/s. Mrs. Isolyne Saroj bashini Bose, AIR 1926 SC 1471 the claim of Chhanga Singh and Mehar Singh could not be entertained without a probate or letters of administration attached to the will. It was one of the points which were raised before the Division Bench in F. A. No. 32 of 1955: (AIR 1965 Punj 140) Mst. Ashrafi V/s. Tirlok Chand, and according to the statements of the counsel made at the bar the point raised by Mr. Mittal is no longer available to the respondents in view of the decision given by the Division Bench in Mst. Ashrafis case, F. A. No. 32, of 1955: (AIR 1965 Punj 140) delivered after the vacation in 1964.
3. As mentioned before, the point for determination in this appeal, therefore, is whether the finding of the learned District Judge about the locus stand of the appellants can be upheld? The will Exhibit A. 1 of 18th of June, 1956, executed by Raj Kaur, widow of Arjan Singh of village Ladipur mentions that she was widowed about 46 years ago and her son Udham Singh had Pre-deceased his two wives who also died in quick sessions without leaving any issue. Mehar Singh, her brothers son according to the recitals of this will, had been living with her since he was one year old. She has mentioned that Chhanga Singh, her other nephew like Mehar Singh, had been assisting her to regain possession of the lands belonging to her son Udham Singh which the collateral had obtained by the force. Both these nephews had expended lot of money on litigation on her behalf. Chhanga Singh had also been acting as her attorney. In lieu of the services which these two nephews had rendered she bequeathed her entire property to them and declared them to be the legatees of her estate. Both Chhanga Singh and Mehar Singh were to hold the estate of the testatrix in equal shares.
4. The will appears to be natural document and does not appear to have been executed under any stress or pressure. In fact, it was the help given to Raj Kaur in the litigation with Chhanga Singh and Mehar Singh which made them the object of her bounty. The will is thumb-marked by the testatrix and there are as many as five persons who have signed as
AI
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.