LexVoiceIndia
Case Laws Series
Mere Proof of Attestation Not Sufficient to Prove Will When Surrounded by Suspicious Circumstances
Brief Facts
The predecessor-in-interest of the appellant (widow of the testator) filed a suit claiming ownership of the property left by her husband, Chhajju Ram, an illiterate agriculturist who died issueless in 1992. She was his sole Class I heir under intestate succession.
The defendants claimed title on the basis of a registered Will dated 6 November 1974, which completely disinherited the widow and bequeathed the property to distant persons.
The Trial Court and First Appellate Court rejected the Will due to suspicious circumstances. The Himachal Pradesh High Court reversed the concurrent findings solely on the ground that attestation had been proved. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court judgment and restored the decrees of the courts below.
Legal Principle
Where the execution of a Will is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, mere proof of attestation by examining an attesting witness under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is not sufficient to establish the genuineness of the Will. In such cases, the propounder of the Will bears an additional and heavier burden to offer cogent and convincing explanation of the suspicious circumstances and to satisfy the judicial conscience of the Court that the document truly represents the free and informed wishes of the testator.
- Disposition in favour of distant persons while completely disinheriting the sole Class I heir (widow) is unnatural and raises serious suspicion.
- When the testator is illiterate and can only put a thumb impression, the burden on the propounder becomes heavier to prove free will and full understanding of the Will.
- Incorrect recitals in the Will and uninitialled cuttings on the registration page further deepen the suspicion.
- Registration of the Will alone does not dispel legitimate doubts surrounding its execution.
- A long gap between execution of the Will and death of the testator is not, by itself, a suspicious circumstance.
- Findings of the final court of fact on suspicious circumstances do not ordinarily raise a substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC.
Outcome
The judgment of the High Court is set aside. The decree of the Trial Court, as affirmed by the First Appellate Court, is restored. There shall be no order as to costs.