Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

High Court Grants Probate for Registered Will - Upholding Validity and Execution

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the High Court of Delhi has granted probate for a registered Will, affirming its validity and execution. The judgement, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, has settled a crucial legal dispute surrounding the testamentary document. The case, titled Test.Cas. 4/2017, involved Mrs. Sharda Relan as the appellant seeking probate of the Will executed by her deceased husband, late Sh. Narinder Dev Relan.

The court carefully considered the evidence presented by the petitioner, who relied on the attestation of the Will by two witnesses and its registration on 22nd March 2012. The Will encompassed all the assets of the deceased, and a comprehensive list of these assets was submitted to the court. The court examined the testimony of an attesting witness, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Rastogi, who confirmed the execution and authenticity of the Will.

“The petitioner has been able to prove the Will of the deceased as his last and final testament,” stated Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri. The court highlighted that the respondent did not challenge the genuineness or validity of the Will and did not provide any evidence to rebut the petitioner’s case. Additionally, the court referred to Section 68 of the Evidence Act, which allows the proof of a Will by examining only one attesting witness.

“This decision establishes the principle that the due execution of a Will can be proved by examining any one of the attesting witnesses,” the court emphasized, citing a recent Supreme Court judgment (Murthy v. C. Saradambal). The court further clarified the limited scope of its jurisdiction in testamentary matters, stating that it does not interpret the Will or determine the title of the deceased to the bequeathed properties.

The judgement also touched upon the applicability of res judicata, noting that the principle applies not only to separate proceedings but also to subsequent stages of the same proceedings. Thus, the court declined to entertain objections that were beyond the jurisdiction of the testamentary case.

With the court finding no impediment in concluding the validity and execution of the Will, probate was granted, subject to the payment of necessary stamp duty and court fees. The court ordered the petitioner to furnish an administrative bond, and the probate would be issued upon completion of formalities.

This decision has significant implications for probate cases, clarifying the evidentiary requirements for proving the execution and validity of a Will. It reaffirms the importance of proper attestation and registration, while respecting the testamentary jurisdiction of the court.

The judgement highlights the court’s role in the probate process, as Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri eloquently stated, “The court exercising testamentary jurisdiction neither interprets the Will nor decides the title of the deceased to the properties bequeathed.”

This judgement adds to the growing body of case law on testamentary matters and provides guidance for future probate cases. Legal experts are applauding the court’s decision, considering it a significant contribution to the jurisprudence surrounding Will execution and probate procedures.      

Date of Decision: 17th July 2023

MRS SHARDA RELAN  vs STATE & ORS              

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Mrs_Sharda_Relan_vs_State_Ors_on_17_July_2023_Del-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News