Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi 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