IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.
SATINDER KAUR AND OTHERS – Appellant
Vs.
JASWINDER KAUR AND OTHERS – Respondent
R.S.A. No. 1751 of 2014 (O&M)
Decided on : 06-10-2015
Will - Property Dispute - Hindu Succession Act - Section 15, Section 16 - The court discussed the validity of two Wills, one registered in 1997 and the other unregistered in 2002, and their implications on the succession of property under the Hindu Succession Act. The court found the unregistered Will to be surrounded by suspicious circumstances and upheld the validity of the registered Will, thereby influencing the distribution of the property.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiffs filed a suit claiming sole ownership of a house initially allotted to their grandfather. The dispute arose from the execution of two Wills by the grandfather's wife, with the validity of the unregistered Will being contested.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the unregistered Will to be surrounded by suspicious circumstances and upheld the validity of the registered Will, leading to a distribution of the property as per the Hindu Succession Act.
Issues: Validity of two Wills, succession of property, and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the unregistered Will.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the validity of the registered Will and found the unregistered Will to be surrounded by suspicious circumstances, influencing the distribution of the property as per the Hindu Succession Act.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed as no law point worth consideration was found in the case.
Raj Mohan Singh, J.
Plaintiffs are in second appeal against the concurrent findings of the Courts below.
2. Plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration to the effect that they were sole owners of house No. 2616, measuring 8 marlas, Phase 7, Mohali and for permanent injunction restraining defendants No. 1 and 2 from getting the said house transferred in their names along with names of the plaintiffs. House in dispute was initially allotted to Mukhtiar Singh, who was grandfather of the plaintiffs i.e. father of Harinder Singh (now deceased) and father-in-law of Satinder Kaur (widow of Harinder Singh). Subsequently conveyance deed was executed in favour of Mukhtiar Singh.
3. Mukhtiar Singh executed a registered Will dated 7.8.1997 in favour of his wife Sukhwinder Kaur regarding suit property. Mukhtiar Singh died in the year 1998. By virtue of aforesaid Will dated 7.8.1997, Ex.P-2, Mukhtiar Singh bequeathed all his properties in favour of Sukhwinder Kaur-wife. After the death of Mukhtiar Singh, Sukhwinder Kaur became absolute owner of the property in question. This Will was got registered on 14.8.1997 with Sub Registrar, Mohali. Member of Municipal Council and one Ashwani Kumar, Advocate attested the Will as marginal witnesses. The Will carried the photographs of the testator. The expert evidence also corroborated the factum of genuine signatures of Mukhtiar Singh appearing on this Will dated 7.8.1997. Testimony of PW-2 Kranti Kumar Sharma, handwriting expert, was on the record in this context. The standard signatures of Mukhtiar Singh, Mark S-1 and S-2 were found to be duly in consonance with questioned signatures on Will and the expert opinion found the same to have been written by the same person. The veracity of the Will could not be shattered by any evidence to the contrary. Even the Will was duly testified by Sh. J.S. Sohal, Advocate, who appeared as PW-5. Execution of this Will was not in dispute and had been found on all legal parameters to be validly executed.
4. Sukhwinder Kaur was alleged to have executed unregistered Will dated 29.4.2002 in favour of Harinder Singh (deceased) i.e. father of the plaintiffs. This Will is the bone of contention in the present case.
5. The marginal witnesses, namely, Rajinder Kaur and Satwinder Kaur were alleged to have witnessed the said Will, which was also shown to have been signed by Sh. S.H.Chajj, Advocate. Firstly, the thumb impression of Sukhwinder Kaur was found to be very faint in terms of visibility and ridges etc. Even though the Will was allegedly executed in front of an advocate. No reasonable explanation is forthcoming for having affixed such type of thumb impression on the Will. The marginal witness Rajinder Kaur, while appearing as PW-1 could not explain the suspicious circumstance when she stated in her cross-examination that she did not know as to how many children were born to Sukhwinder Kaur. She stated in unequivocal terms that Sukhwinder Kaur used to sign but on the date of execution of Will, she was extremely ill and was not in a position to sign the Will. The Will was prepared on 29.4.2002 and Sukhwinder Kaur died on 1.5.2002 as per findings recorded by the trial Court. It means that Sukhwinder Kaur was ailed to such an extent that she could not sign the document rather her thumb impressions were obtained in the manner as suggested in earlier part of the order. Further the witness has stated that the papers on which the Will was written was a stamp paper but the perusal of Will shows that it was not a stamp paper. The testator was to dispel the suspicious circumstances beyond all reasonable doubts. The Will dated 29.4.2002 was held to be surrounded with suspicious circumstances by the trial Court. The trial Court partly decreed the suit on the ground that since the Will dated 29.4.2002 has been found to be a genuine Will, entire property of Mukhtiar Singh went to his wife Sukhwinder Kaur. On the death of Sukhwinder Kaur, the property was inherited equally by Hari
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.