138 NI Act | Admission Of Signatures On Cheque Triggers Statutory Presumption Of Debt: Punjab & Haryana HC Magistrate Cannot Straightaway Issue NBW For Non-Appearance If Accused Is Already On Bail; Bail Valid Until Cancelled: Orissa High Court Bank Cannot Dishonour Cheques Merely Because Account Title Changed From Partnership To Proprietorship: Madhya Pradesh High Court Environmental Clearance Is Site-Specific; Violations At Different Site By Related Entity Not Ground To Deny New EC: Kerala High Court Advocate’s Failure To Formally Prove Fee Bill Not Fatal To Claim If Oral Evidence Establishes Non-Payment Of Agreed Professional Fees: Delhi High Court Police Officers Cannot Fight Over Specific Postings; Disciplined Force Must Prioritize Public Interest Over Location: Karnataka High Court RERA Section 18 Interest For Delayed Possession Is An Unqualified Absolute Right; Notice Under Section 55 Contract Act Not Required: Bombay High Court State Cannot Hand Over Additional Charge Of Sensitive Posts To Tainted Officers Facing Disciplinary Action: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mandatory Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Essential If Accused Resides Outside Jurisdiction; Commercial Breach Not Criminal Offence: Calcutta High Court Disciplinary Enquiry Cannot Be Quashed Merely For Delay In Conclusion; 6-Month Timeline Under G.O.Ms.No.679 Is Directory: Andhra Pradesh High Court Exoneration In Adjudication Proceedings No Bar To Criminal Prosecution If CBI Collects Independent Evidence Of Forgery & Conspiracy: Bombay High Court Public Prosecutor Not A 'Post Office' Of Investigating Agency; Independent Application Of Mind Mandatory For Extending Remand Beyond 180 Days Under NDPS Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Complainant Cannot Use Section 311 CrPC To Reopen Pre-Charge Stage After Explicit Waiver & Framing Of Charges: Allahabad High Court Bomb Blast In Train Is An 'Accident' Under Railways Act, Union Of India Liable To Pay Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Bail Hearing Can Proceed In Informant's Absence If Notice Was Served Despite Section 483(2) BNSS Mandate: Allahabad High Court

EXCLUSION OF NATURAL HEIRS IN A WILL NOT RAISE SUSPICION, EXCLUDING DAUGHTERS FROM INHERITANCE – P&H HC

03 September 2024 10:27 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided by Mrs. Alka Sarin, J., has dismissed an appeal while affirming the validity of a will that excludes daughters from inheritance. The judgment, delivered on 31st May 2022, emphasizes that the exclusion of natural heirs in a will does not raise suspicion, citing the precedent set in the case of Ramabai Padamakar Patil (D) through LRs. V. Rukminibai Vishnu Vekhande.

In her judgment, Mrs. Alka Sarin, J., stated, “Merely because the daughters of the Testator have been left out from the Will is not sufficient ground to discard it.” The court’s reference to the aforementioned precedent establishes the principle that the exclusion of natural heirs in a will is not inherently suspicious.

The dispute centered around the estate left behind by Sat Narayan, with the plaintiffs asserting that the properties in question were ancestral and seeking a declaration of their rights. Conversely, the defendant presented a will executed by Sat Narayan, which excluded the daughters from inheritance.

By upholding the validity of the will, the High Court has underscored the importance of proving the ancestral nature of properties in such disputes. This ruling serves as a significant precedent for future cases involving wills and inheritance rights, emphasizing that the exclusion of natural heirs does not in itself cast doubt on the validity of a will.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision clarifies the legal position, ensuring that the intentions of the testator are respected while settling disputes over ancestral property and inheritance rights.

Date of Decision: 31.05.2022.

Smt. Sunita Devi vs Smt. Shalu Devi and Ors.

 

Latest Legal News