Meenadchipillai v Karthigesu
Where an application for probate of a will is resisted and circumstances exist
which excite the suspicion of the Court, "whatever
their nature may be, it is
for those who propound the will to remove such suspicion, and to prove
affirmatively that the testator
knew and approved of the contents of the
document, and it is only where this is done that the onus is thrown on those who
oppose
the will to prove fraud or undue influence, or whatever else they rely on
to displace the case made for proving the will ."
The following circumstances were held to be suspicious in the present case,
where it was shown that the testator died within seven
hours after the execution
of the will in a hospital :-(1) The testator was so ill at the time of execution
that he was unable to
speak or to hold a pen to write his signature. (2) The
Notary did not take the obvious precaution of consulting a doctor at the
time he
took instructions from the testator or at the time of executing the will. (3)
The petitioner, who was the widow of the
testator and to whom the bulk of the
property was devised, was a near r
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.