Back
LISA GILL
Maghar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Kartar Kaur – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Lisa Gill, J.
This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellants challenging judgment and decree dated 08.02.1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mansa whereby suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 are owners in possession of 3/8th share of land in question, had been dismissed. Challenge is also to judgment and decree dated 09.10.2000 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Mansa whereby appeal filed by the present appellants - plaintiffs has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the matter are that appellant - plaintiffs filed a suit seeking declaration to the effect that plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 are owners in possession of the property in question belonging to Chand Singh on the basis of Will dated 05.08.1981 registered on 06.08.1981 and that mutation 2596 dated 07.10.1994 is illegal, having no effect on the rights of the plaintiff and defendant No. 2. It is pleaded in the plaint that Chand Singh son of Sham Singh was owner in possession of 3/8th share of land measuring 340 kanals 1 marla situated in revenue limits of village Chakerian. Chand Singh died issueless on 15.04.1993.
A proponent of a Will must dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution; mere assertion is insufficient to establish validity.
The validity of a Will and the timeliness of challenging property mutations are crucial in inheritance disputes.
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 court affirmed that the burden of proof lies with the claimant to establish the validity of a Will, which was not met by the appellant in this case.
A Will's validity hinges on proving its proper execution and attestation; mere failure to favor certain heirs does not indicate suspicious circumstances.
Determination of Will validity requires adherence to statutory conditions, burden of proof lies with the challenger; possession claims alone do not supersede validly executed instruments.
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
