Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court 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 Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Order, Grants Probate of Will Dated 2007: Emphasizes on Removing Suspicious Circumstances for Will Acceptance

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment pronounced on February 5, 2024, the Delhi High Court overturned the Trial Court’s decision, granting probate of a Will dated April 4, 2007, in the case of Vijender Singh versus State & Ors. The case, marked by complexities of property rights and legitimacy of a will, highlights the intricate legal standards applied to testamentary disputes.

The appellant, Vijender Singh, had challenged the Trial Court’s decision dated April 26, 2018, which dismissed his probate petition concerning a will executed by his mother, Smt. Lado. The disputed properties are located in Village Khizrabad, New Delhi.

The case pivoted on the Indian Succession Act, 1925, with crucial references to Sections 63 and 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The appellant’s counsel, Mr. Sunil Choudhary, argued that the Trial Court failed to recognize the Will as a legally enforceable document, being unduly influenced by minor contradictions.

Respondent No. 3 contested the Will’s authenticity, claiming it to be a fake document and alleging ancestral rights over the properties.

Justice Shalinder Kaur, while delivering the judgment, noted, “The first fundamental aspect is whether the testatrix understood the contents of the Will.” The Court meticulously examined the testimonies and evidence, emphasizing the principles governing the proof of a Will as established in various Supreme Court decisions.

The High Court identified that the Will’s execution was proven in accordance with the pertinent sections of the Indian Succession Act and the Indian Evidence Act. It was found that the suspicious circumstances noted by the Trial Court were not substantial enough to override the evidence proving the Will’s authenticity.

The High Court set aside the impugned order of the Trial Court, accepting the appeal and granting probate of the Will subject to the payment of requisite stamp duty and fee. The Court ordered, “The appellant/petitioner is exempted from furnishing any security bond.”

Date of Decision:  05.02.2024

VIJENDER SINGH VS STATE & ORS

 

Latest Legal News