Back
B. S. WALIA
Kranti Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Raksha Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and possession declaration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. challenging the validity of the will. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. suspicious circumstances surrounding the will. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. suspicion based on timing and execution of the will. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. final dismissal of appeal. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. B.S. Walia, J. (Oral)
Challenge in the instant regular second appeal is to judgment and decree dated 19.11.2022, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 08.08.2017, passed by the learned trial Court dismissing the suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff.
2. A perusal of the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court reveals that the appellant-plaintiff had filed a suit for a declaration that he was owner and possession of the properties
The burden of proof rests on the party asserting the validity of a Will, which must be established free from suspicious circumstances.
The validity of a will is undermined when it is executed under suspicious circumstances, necessitating the propounder to dispel these doubts for the document to be accepted legally.
The crucial legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to prove his relationship with the deceased and the validity of the Will in property disputes.
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
