Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!

Scanned Judgements…!

Checking relevance for B. O. I. Finance LTD. VS Custodian...

Checking relevance for Aluru Kondayya VS Singaraju Rama Rao...

Checking relevance for R. E. M. S. Abdul Hameed VS Govindaraju...

Checking relevance for Sailendra Narayan Bhanja Deo VS State Of Orissa...

Checking relevance for Sugra Bibi VS Hazi Kummumia...

Checking relevance for Reliance Airport Developers Pvt. LTD. VS Airports Authority of India...

Checking relevance for Pollisetti Pullamma VS Kalluri Kameswaramma...

Checking relevance for Ashutosh Kumar Singh VS Kaushalya Devi...

Ashutosh Kumar Singh VS Kaushalya Devi - 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 22 : Non-parties to an unprobated Will who derive title from it can tender the Will in evidence to prove their rights. The estate of the deceased testator vests in the executor immediately upon death, conferring rights upon him, and a legatee derives title and authority from the Will of the testator, not from the grant of probate. A legatee is a creature of the Will and comes into existence as soon as the Will becomes operative upon the testator''''s death. Therefore, a legatee under an unprobated Will can institute a suit or set up a claim by way of defence, and can be allowed to be substituted or added as a party, even though their claim cannot be established until probate or letters of administration are granted. This confirms that such non-parties can rely on the unprobated Will in evidence to assert their rights.Checking relevance for Sunny Johar VS Bhupendra Pratap Singh...

Sunny Johar VS Bhupendra Pratap Singh - 2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 35 : The court held that the validity of a registered but unprobated Will must be adjudicated by a competent court, and that rights claimed under such a Will—whether by parties to the Will or those deriving title from it—can only be determined through judicial determination. The court emphasized that the substitution of parties in a partition suit based on an unprobated Will was justified to allow for a complete adjudication of claims, indicating that non-parties to the Will who derive title from it may tender the Will in evidence to prove their rights, provided the issue of the Will''''s validity and their entitlement is resolved by a competent court.Checking relevance for Sunny Johar VS Bhupendra Pratap Singh...

Sunny Johar VS Bhupendra Pratap Singh - 2024 0 Supreme(Jhk) 33 : The court held that the mere fact that a Will has not been probated does not preclude individuals from claiming rights under it. The validity of claims based on an unprobated Will must be determined through judicial proceedings, and the absence of probate does not automatically invalidate such claims. Therefore, non-parties to the Will who derive title from it can tender the registered but unprobated Will in evidence to prove their rights, as the issue of rights should be adjudicated by the court rather than assumed by the parties.Checking relevance for Saraswathy Bhuvarahan VS Akila Vijayakumar...

Checking relevance for Mujibur Rehman Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui VS Noorjahan Begum Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui...

Mujibur Rehman Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui VS Noorjahan Begum Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 901 : Non-parties to an unprobated Will who derive title from it can tender the Will in evidence to prove their rights. Section 213 of the Succession Act bars the establishment of a right as executor or legatee in a court unless probate or letters of administration have been granted, but it does not preclude instituting a suit or setting up a defence on the basis of an unprobated Will. A legatee or executor of an unprobated Will can institute a suit or take a defence, and can be substituted in place of the testator or added as a party, even without probate. The Will can be tendered in evidence to prove rights, but a decree cannot be passed in favour of a plaintiff or defence accepted unless probate or letters of administration are obtained before disposal of the suit.Checking relevance for Ramanand Thakur VS Parmanand Thakur...

Checking relevance for Krishna Kumar Birla VS Rajendra Singh Lodha...

Checking relevance for H. Venkatachala Iyengar VS B. N. Thimmajamma...

Checking relevance for Kasturchand Chhotmal VS Kapurchand Kewalchand...

Checking relevance for RATAN LAL VS HARI SHANKER...

Checking relevance for Kunvarjeet Singh Khandpur VS Kirandeep Kaur...

Checking relevance for T. Venkata Narayana VS Venkata Subbamma...

Checking relevance for Ramesh Chandra Ganguly VS Sudhamoy Ganguly...

Ramesh Chandra Ganguly VS Sudhamoy Ganguly - 1987 0 Supreme(Cal) 170 : An unprobated Will can be admitted into evidence in a proceeding other than a probate proceeding for collateral purposes, such as to prove the intention of the testator regarding his estate or to prove certain statements made by the testator therein regarding acquisition of his estate. Non-parties to the Will who derive title from it may tender the unprobated Will in evidence for such collateral purposes, provided it is not used to prove title under the Will itself, but rather to establish the testator''''s intention or statements about the acquisition of property.

• Unprobated Will as Evidence for Title - An unprobated Will, such as the one marked as Ex.B1 from 1936, can be used by non-parties to the Will to trace their rights, but only for collateral purposes and not to establish direct title. Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act states that beneficiaries derive their title only upon probate. Relying solely on an unprobated Will for substantive rights is generally not permissible, as courts have held that such Will cannot be used as primary evidence of title in probate proceedings (RAVI KUMAR vs V.KOTTI @ MADUBALA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 32490).

• Use of Unprobated Will in Litigation - Courts recognize that unprobated Wills cannot be marked as evidence for establishing title or rights in property directly. However, they can be admitted for collateral purposes in other proceedings, provided the circumstances support such use (Saraswathy Bhuvarahan VS Akila Vijayakumar - 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 996). The courts emphasize that the primary purpose of probate is to confirm the Will's validity before establishing title, and without probate, the Will's evidentiary value is limited.

• Non-Probated Will and Rights of Non-Parties - Non-parties to a Will, or those claiming rights derived from it, cannot generally tender the Will as evidence to prove their rights unless it has been probated. The absence of probate limits the Will's evidentiary effect, meaning that parties relying on an unprobated Will must do so cautiously and often only for collateral or supporting purposes, not as conclusive proof of ownership (RAVI KUMAR vs V.KOTTI @ MADUBALA - 2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 32490, Saraswathy Bhuvarahan VS Akila Vijayakumar - 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 996).

• Legal Precedents and Limitations - Courts have consistently held that probate is essential to establish a Will's validity and confer title. While unprobated Wills may be examined for collateral purposes, they do not serve as definitive proof of ownership unless probated. The burden of proof remains on the party asserting rights based on such Wills, and non-probated Wills cannot replace the formal probate process in establishing title (Mujibur Rehman Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui VS Noorjahan Begum Haji Israr Alam Siddiqui - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 901, THE STATE OF KARNATAKA vs M A MOHAMAD SANAULLA - Karnataka (2021)).

Analysis and Conclusion:In the context of the 1936 Will, which remains unprobated, non-parties cannot tender it as conclusive evidence to prove their rights or derive title. Such Wills may only be used for collateral purposes in other proceedings, but they do not substitute for probate in establishing ownership rights. Therefore, to prove rights derived from the Will, probate is necessary, and without it, the Will's evidentiary value is limited, especially for non-parties seeking to establish direct title.