Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Janki Narayan Bhoir VS Narayan Namdeo Kadam...
2003 1 Supreme 297 : One attesting witness can prove the attestation by the other witness if, in their evidence, they personally satisfy all the requirements of Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, including that they saw the testator sign or affix their mark, or saw someone else sign in the testator''''s presence and by their direction, or received a personal acknowledgement from the testator, and that they signed the will in the presence of the testator. The witness must also testify that they saw the other attesting witness perform their attestation duties. If the one attesting witness fails to prove the attestation by the other witness, the evidence falls short of meeting the mandatory requirements of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and the will cannot be proved by ''''other evidence'''' under Section 71 unless the other witness is unavailable or denies/does not recollect the execution.Checking relevance for Brij Raj Singh VS Sewak Ram...
1999 4 Supreme 287 : Under Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872, the execution of a document required by law to be attested can be proved by calling one attesting witness, even if the document was attested by two witnesses. The law does not require the attesting witness to prove that the other witness saw the execution. The testimony of one attesting witness that the donor signed the document in his presence and that he himself attested it is sufficient to prove the execution and attestation. This principle was affirmed in multiple High Court judgments, including Venkata Reddi v. Muthu Pambulu, Lachman Singh v. Surendra Bahadur, and Dhiren Bailung v. Bhutuki & Ors., which held that compliance with Section 68 is sufficient to prove the document''''s execution and attestation, and that the requirement of proving both witnesses saw the execution is not mandated by law unless the validity of the attestation is specifically challenged.Checking relevance for V. Kalyanaswamy(D) By Lrs. VS L. Bakthavatsalam(D) By Lrs. ...
2020 5 Supreme 641 : Under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, when a Will is required to be executed in the mode provided in Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, it is incumbent upon an attesting witness, when examined, to prove not only his own attestation but also the attestation by the other attesting witness. This requirement applies when the attesting witness is available and willing to testify. However, under Section 69 of the Evidence Act, which applies when both attesting witnesses are dead or unavailable, the requirement is relaxed: it is sufficient to prove that the attestation of at least one attesting witness is in his handwriting, and that the signature of the testator is in the handwriting of the testator. Section 69 does not require proof of the attestation by the other witness.Checking relevance for JAGDISH CHAND SHARMA VS NARAIN SINGH SAINI (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LRs. ...
2015 4 Supreme 96 : Under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a Will can be proved by the evidence of one attesting witness. However, that witness must prove the execution of the Will and the attestation by the other attesting witness in the manner required by Section 63(c) of the Act. If the attesting witness examined fails to prove the attestation by the other witness, the evidence is insufficient, and the Will cannot be considered validly executed. The other attesting witness must be called to supplement the evidence if they are available and amenable to the Court''''s process. Section 71 of the Act does not permit the propounder to bypass this requirement by relying on other evidence when the second attesting witness is available but not examined.Checking relevance for Babu Singh VS Ram Sahai @ Ram Singh...
Checking relevance for Dhanpat VS Sheo Ram (Deceased) through LRs. ...
2020 3 Supreme 592 : One attesting witness can prove the attestation by the other witness by deposing that both the testator and the other attesting witness were present at the time of execution and signing of the will. In the present case, DW-3 Maha Singh deposed that he and Azad Singh signed as witnesses, the testator also signed, and the Will was typed in his presence. The cross-examination did not dispute his presence or the presence of the testator and the other witness. The court held that the statement of the attesting witness proves the due execution of the will, including the attestation by the other witness, and that the requirement of Section 63 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act is satisfied. The presence of the other attesting witness is a factual matter to be determined from the evidence, and the testimony of one attesting witness is sufficient to establish the presence and attestation of the other, provided there is no contradiction in the evidence.
