V. Prabhakara vs Basavaraj K. (Dead) by Lr.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(SC) 599

V. Prabhakara – Appellant
Versus
Basavaraj K. (Dead) by Lr. – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) Mr. Anand Sanjay M. Nuli, Adv. Mr. Suraj Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Agam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dharm Singh, Adv. M/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. S. J. Amith, Adv. Mr. Krishna Kumar, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, AOR

Judgement Key Points

How to determine the validity of a will under Indian Succession Act sections 63 and 68 in the presence of competing exhibits P4 and D1? What is the appropriate appellate approach under Section 96 CPC when reviewing findings of fact related to execution and genuineness of a will? What are the factors that establish or negate "suspicious circumstances" surrounding a testamentary document and how should courts weigh such circumstances on appeal?

How to determine the validity of a will under Indian Succession Act sections 63 and 68 in the presence of competing exhibits P4 and D1?

What is the appropriate appellate approach under Section 96 CPC when reviewing findings of fact related to execution and genuineness of a will?

What are the factors that establish or negate "suspicious circumstances" surrounding a testamentary document and how should courts weigh such circumstances on appeal?

JUDGMENT :

M.M. SUNDRESH, J.

BACKGROUND FACTS:

1. The Suit Property originally belonged to one Ms. Jessie Jayalakshmi (since deceased). The deceased Ms. Jessie Jayalakshmi, a spinster, was the maternal aunt of the Appellant/Plaintiff. Mr. Vijay Kumar and Ms. Kantha Lakshmi were his brother and sister, respectively. It is the case of the Appellant that the deceased, Ms. Jessie Jayalakshmi adopted him as her son and that he took care of her when she suffered an attack of paralysis.

2. A registered Will under Exhibit P4 was executed by Ms. Jessie Jayalakshmi on 04.09.1985 in favour of the Appellant. The said Will was attested by Mr. Vijay Kumar, brother of the Appellant, who has also been examined as PW2. Ms. Jessie Jayalakshmi was also brought to the office of the Sub-Registrar by none other than Ms. Kantha Lakshmi.

3. The relationship between Ms. Kantha Lakshmi and her husband, who has been arrayed as Respondent No. 1 got strained. She consequently filed a petition for divorce in MC No. 879 of 1987 before the Family Court of Principal Judge, Bangalore and obtained a divorce decree on 26.03.1988. It is the further case of the Appellant that Respondent No. 1 was permitted to reside in the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(SC) 599

V. Prabhakara – AppellantVersusBasavaraj K. (Dead) by Lr. – Respondent

How to determine the validity of a will under Indian Succession Act sections 63 and 68 in the presence of competing exhibits P4 and D1?

What is the appropriate appellate approach under Section 96 CPC when reviewing findings of fact related to execution and genuineness of a will?

What are the factors that establish or negate "suspicious circumstances" surrounding a testamentary document and how should courts weigh such circumstances on appeal?

V. Prabhakara – Appellant
Versus
Basavaraj K. (Dead) by Lr. – Respondent