Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36667
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL, MR. JUSTICE C.M.JOSHI, JJ
SMT. M.S.KOMALA – Appellant
Versus
SRI M.N.SRINIVASAN – Respondent
RFA 134 / 2013
SRI CHAITANYA HEGDE, ADVOCATE; SRI G R MOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R9; SRI R SHIVAPRASAD, ADVOCATE (APPOINTED AS RECEIVER V/O DTD: 27.09.2023)
The propounder of a Will must dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution to establish its validity.
Headnote:
Will - Testamentary Dispute - Indian Succession Act - Sections 63, 68 - The court examined the validity of two Wills, emphasizing the burden of proof on the propounder and the presence of suspicious circumstances surrounding the later Will, ultimately declaring it null and void.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs sought to declare a later Will of the deceased as null and void, asserting that an earlier Will was valid. The deceased had a history of health issues and had executed multiple Wills, with the last one favoring the plaintiffs. The defendants claimed the later Will was valid and executed under the deceased's free will.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the later Will was surrounded by suspicious circumstances, including the deceased's health condition and the lack of credible evidence regarding its execution. The court concluded that the defendants failed to prove the later Will's validity.
Issues: Whether the later Will was valid and whether the earlier Will should be upheld as the last testament of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the burden of proof lies with the propounder of the Will to dispel any suspicious circumstances surrounding its execution, which the defendants failed to do.
Final Decision: The appeal is allowed; the later Will is declared null and void, and the earlier Will is upheld.
JUDGMENT
C.M.JOSHI J.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree in OS No.3257/1997 dated 14-08-2012, passed by the VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH 15) Bangalore,whereby the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed, the plaintiffs have approached this Court in appeal.
2. The parties would be referred to as per their ranks before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3. The brief facts of the case are as below:
(A) The plaintiffs approached the trial Court seeking the relief of declaration that the Will dated 23-01-1996 registered on 27-01-1996 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Bangalore, as the Will of M.N.Ranganathan, is null and void and to declare that the Will dated 30-12-1992 executed by Sri M.N. Ranganathan, registered by the Sub-Registrar, Shivajinagar, Bangalore, is his last Will under which plaintiffs No. 1 and 2 have succeeded to the estate of deceased M.N. Ranganathan, in terms of the said Will. They also sought for such other consequential and appropriate reliefs.
(B) The suit schedule property includes House bearing No.S-50, situated at KIRLOSKAR Colony, 3rd stage, Kamalanagar Main Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore- 560079 (hereinafter referred to as the House at Kamalanagar) and the other assets in the form of Fixed Deposits, Shares, Scooter bearing No.CAH 7196, the membership and the shares held by the testator M.N. Ranganathan in Kirlosker Electric Company Employees Co-operative Society, the amounts in credit in his S.B. Accounts, etc., which are shown as Item No.2 to 5 and Schedule-C,D and E to the plaint.
(C) It is the case of the plaintiffs that defendant No.10 - M.N. Shivaprakash, defendant No. 1- M.N.Srinivasan, testator M.N. Ranganathan and one Sarojamma are the children of late M.S. Narayana Gowda, from his first wife Janakamma; defendants No.2 to 6 are the children of late Sri M.S.Narayana Gowda from his second wife-Nagamma; defendants No. 7 and 8 are the daughters of defendant No.5, and defendant No.9 is the daughter of defendant No.6. Plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are the children and plaintiff No.3 is the widow of defendant No.10- Dr.M.N.Shivaprakash, who died during the pendency of the suit. The genealogical tree of the plaintiffs and defendants are as below:
(D) Plaintiffs stated that the testator i.e., M.N. Ranganathan was a divorcee without any issues and he was suffering from serious heart ailments since the age of his 23 years and in the year 1963 he had undergone Mitral Valvotomy and in the year 1992 he had undergone Mitral Valve replacement at the Hospital at Vellore. He was employed in M/s. Kirloskar Electric Company Limited and took voluntary retirement as Senior Engineer in the year 1993. He was staying alone in his house at Kamalanagar, Bangalore. It is stated that the testator M.N.Ranganathan, had married to one N.S. Sunanda Reddy in the year 1979 and later, there was a divorce between them by virtue of a decree of the Court in MC No.263/1981. The testator M.N.Ranganathan, had executed a registered Will dated 26-06-1981, (Ex.P2) bequeathing all his properties in favour of M.N.Shivaprakash, i.e., defendant No.10 and defendant No.1- M.N.Srinivasan. By that time, he was allotted the site by Kirloskar Electric Company Limited Employees Co-operative Society and after his divorce in MC No.263/1981, he remained single. Thereafter, the relationship of the testator M.N.Ranganathan strained with defendant No.1 and therefore, he revoked his earlier Will dated 26-06-1981 and executed another Will dated 01-03-1985 (Ex.P9) and registered the same before the Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bangalore, bequeathing all his properties in favour of his eldest brother M.N. Shivaprakash i.e., defendant No.10 and his children.
(E) On 28-3-1985, father of the testator Sri M.S. Narayana Gowda died, leaving behind him a Will under which, a house in Ulsoor was bequeathed in favour of the testator and defendant No.1 jointly. Then, he constructed a house in his site at Kamalanagar and started residing there alone. The
