Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

"Presumption as to documents thirty years old does not apply to wills," : Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Date: March 14, 2023

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the validity of a will despite the absence of attesting witnesses. The bench, comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Hima Kohli, stated that the presumption under Section 90 of the Evidence Act, which applies to documents thirty years old, does not extend to the proof of wills. The court emphasized that wills must be proved in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and Section 68 of the Evidence Act. Referring to a previous judgment, the court declared, "A presumption regarding documents 30 years old does not apply to a will."

The case involved a dispute over the execution and validity of a will, wherein the appellant contested the grant of letters of administration based on suspicious circumstances and an alleged delay in seeking relief. The respondents, however, successfully proved the will's authenticity by presenting the testimonies of witnesses who were present during its execution. Additionally, the court considered a registered partition deed that distributed shares as per the terms of the will and an acknowledgment of the will by the appellant's predecessor.

By clarifying the applicability of Section 90 and emphasizing the importance of proper execution and attestation of wills, the Supreme Court has provided clarity on the legal requirements for proving wills. This judgment highlights the significance of alternative means, such as Sections 69 and 71 of the Evidence Act, when attesting witnesses are unavailable. The court's decision ensures the protection of testators' testamentary intentions even in the absence of traditional proof through attesting witnesses.

The judgment reaffirms the position that the validity of wills should be established based on the specific legal provisions governing wills rather than relying solely on the age of the document.

Date of Judgment: March 14, 2023

ASHUTOSH SAMANTA (D) BY LRS. & ORS. vs  RANJAN BALA DASI & ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/14-Mar-2023-ASHUTOSH-vs-Ranjan.pdf"]                                             

Latest Legal News