Back
2008 Supreme(P&H) 1851
2009 (3) RCR(Civ) 253
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RAJIVE BHALLA, J.
Kartar Singh and another -Appellants
Versus
Dilber Singh (dead) through legal representatives -Respondent
R.S.A. No.2007 of 1982
Decided on: 4.11.08
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Arun Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. R.C.Dogra, Advocate with Mr. N.C.Doabia, Advocate for the respondent.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the execution of a Will and to dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, as mandated by the Indian Succession Act.
Headnote:
Wills - Inheritance Dispute - Indian Succession Act, Section 59, 63, 67, 68 - The court affirmed the status of the sister as the sole and exclusive heir of the deceased, upheld the legality of one Will, and rejected the other Will due to suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute pertains to inheritance of an estate left behind by a deceased individual. The appellants, nephews of the deceased, claimed the entire estate based on two Wills, while the sister of the deceased asserted her right as the sole heir.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellants failed to prove the execution of the second Will and to dispel the suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution. The first Will was upheld as genuine and valid.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the Wills, the status of the sister as the heir, and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of the second Will.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Indian Succession Act, particularly Sections 59, 63, 67, and 68, to establish the legal requirements for proof of the execution of a Will and the need to dispel suspicious circumstances. The court also emphasized the importance of removing any legitimate doubts regarding the testator's free will and mind.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower courts' findings that the second Will was a forged and fabricated document, and the first Will was upheld as genuine and valid.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J
1. The appellants impugn judgments and decrees dated 07.09.1979 and 05.08.1982, passed by the Sub Judge, IInd Class, Phillaur and the Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, partly decreeing the suit filed by the respondent and dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants respectively.
2. The dispute, in the present case, pertains to inheritance to the estate left behind by one Milkhi @ Prem Singh, who died unmarried and issueless. Milkhi @ Prem Singh had a brother Bawa Singh and a sister Smt. Indi. Bawa Singh his brother pre deceased him leaving behind four sons Kartar Singh, Joginder Singh, Jita Singh (appellants)and Sadhu Singh.
3. After the demise of Milkhi @ Prem Singh, a suit was filed by Smt. Indi claiming to have succeded to the estate of Milkhi@ Prem Singh as his sole and exclusive heir, being his sister. The appellants/defendants namely Kartar Singh, Joginder Singh, Jita Singh filed a written statement denying that she was the sister of Milkhi @ Prem Singh. In addition, they pleaded that during his life time Milkhi @ Prem Singh executed two Wills dated 11.04.1961 and 28.10.1973 bequeathing his entire property to them.
4. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned trial court framed the following issues:-
1. Whether the plaintiff Indi deceased is the sister of deceased Milkhi?OPP
2. Whether deceased plaintiff Indi is the only heir of deceased Milkhi?OPP
3. Whether deceased Milkhi executed a valid Will dated 11.04.1961 and 28.10.73 in favour of defendants.
4. Relief.
The learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 07.09.1979 held that Smt. Indi was the real sister of Milkhi @ Prem Singh and though it upheld the legality of the registered Will dated 11.04.1961, Ex. D1 it rejected the Will dated 28.10.1973, Ex.D2 by holding that the appellants had failed to prove its execution or dispel the suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution. The suit was, therefore, partly decreed.
5. Aggrieved by the aforementioned judgment, the appellants filed an appeal. The Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, vide judgment and decree dated 05.08.1982 dismissed the appeal, affirmed the status of Smt. Indi as the sister of Milkhi @ Prem Singh, upheld the execution of the Will Ex.D1 dated 11.04.1961 and affirmed the finding of the trial Court, rejecting the Will Ex.D2 dated 28.10.1973.
6. Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have proved the execution of the Will, Ex. D2, by the testator as they have examined Amar Singh, an attesting witness and Hans Raj the scribe. The thumb impressions of Milkhi @ Prem Singh appearing on the Will, Ex.D2 have been proved by the finger print expert produced by the appellants. The learned courts below discarded the Will Ex.D2 on imaginary, insignificant and irrelevant considerations, namely, that the Will is unregistered, no reason has been assigned for disinheriting Smt. Indi, material contradiction exists between the statements of the attesting witness and the scribe, the attesting witness committed an error in identifying the other attesting witness and the entries in the register produced by the scribe are sparse. It is submitted that a Will does not require compulsory registration and the exclusion of a natural heir is a natural consequence of a Will. The alleged discrepancy between the depositions of Hans Raj the scribe and Amar Singh the attesting witness is a mere lapse of memory. The scribe and the attesting witness have deposed in unison as to the execution of the will by Milkhi @ Prem Singh and its attestation by the attesting witnesses and, therefore, the courts below were not justified in rejecting the Will. The inference drawn by the courts below from the sparse entries in scribe's register is unwarranted as he has deposed that he did not have much work. It is also contended that Amar Singh the attesting witness made a bona fide error while identifying the other attesting witness. It is argued that as the courts below have upheld the executio
