Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Contradictory Witness Statements Lead to Failure in Proving Will Execution: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld a judgment that emphasizes the importance of adherence to legal requirements in proving the execution of a disputed will. The decision, rendered by a bench comprising Hon'ble Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, underscores the crucial role of witness statements in establishing the validity of wills.

The case in question involved a disputed will purportedly executed by Leela Devi in favor of Dhani Ram. The trial court had initially disbelieved the will, but the appellate court had reversed the judgment in favor of Dhani Ram. However, the Himachal Pradesh High Court subsequently overturned the appellate court's decision, leading to a special leave appeal filed by Dhani Ram.

The critical issue in this case revolved around the execution of the will, and the court focused on the statements of the attesting witnesses. The witnesses provided contradictory accounts of the events surrounding the will, which raised doubts about its validity. Justice Sanjay Kumar, delivering the verdict, highlighted the significance of complying with legal requirements, stating, "Mere registration would not sanctify a document by attaching to it an irrebuttable presumption of genuineness." He further cited precedents that emphasized the need for careful scrutiny of registered wills.

The court found that neither of the attesting witnesses fulfilled the legal requirements mandated by Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act. While Lok Nath Attri claimed that Leela Devi signed the will in their presence, Chaman Lal vehemently denied this. Moreover, Lok Nath Attri did not state that he signed the will in the presence of Leela Devi, a crucial requirement for will execution.

In light of these contradictions and the failure to establish the execution of the will in accordance with legal requirements, the court upheld the decision of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and Dhani Ram's claim based on the disputed will was rejected.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the meticulous scrutiny applied by the courts in cases involving wills and the critical role of attesting witnesses in proving their validity. It reinforces the principle that compliance with legal requirements is essential when establishing the execution of wills, preventing potential disputes and ensuring the rightful distribution of assets in accordance with the law.

Date of Decision: October 6, 2023

Dhani Ram (died) through LRs. & others  vs Shiv Singh 

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/06-Oct-2023_DHANI-RAM_Vs_SHIV_SINGH.pdf"]

Latest Legal News