Promotees Allowed to Challenge Provisional Seniority List in Dispute Between Direct Recruitment and Promotion: Kerala High Court Frivolous Defenses Cannot Justify Leave to Defend Under Order XXXVII CPC Delhi High Court Candidates Merely Enrolled in Final Year B.V.Sc. Program Ineligible for Veterinary Officer Recruitment: Rajasthan High Court Manufacturing or Sale of Garments Does Not Attract Copyright Protection; Procedural Violations Under Trade Marks Act Renders Prosecution Unsustainable: P&H High Court Ownership Alone Is Not Sufficient to Maintain Eviction Suit; Plaintiff Must Qualify as a Lessor Under Lease Agreement: Calcutta High Court Findings Based on Evidence Cannot Be Interfered With in a Second Appeal Without Substantial Question of Law: AP High Court Chain of Circumstances Broken: Inferences Cannot Replace Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Kerala High Court Bail | Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21 of the Constitution: Bombay High Court Encroachment on a Common Lane Gives Rise to Recurring Cause of Action: Madras High Court Holds Limitation Act Inapplicable to Pathway Disputes Reproductive Autonomy Includes the Right to Abort Without Spousal Consent: P&H High Court Access to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 is Not an Absolute Bar Against MSEFC Awards: Supreme Court Refers Key Questions on Writ Jurisdiction to Larger Bench Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted for Title and Mortgage Disputes Under SARFAESI Act: Supreme Court Principle of Bail is the Rule, Jail is the Exception: Supreme Court Panchayat Law | Mandatory Compliance With Section 34 And Rule 3 Is Non-Negotiable In Resignation Cases: Bombay High Court Quashes Resignation Of Upa-Sarpanch Recovery of Bullet Fired from Accused’s Weapon Crucial: PH High Court Reaffirms Conviction in Murder Case Injured Witness Evidence Carries Built-in Reliability Unless Contradicted Significantly: Kerala High Court Partly Allows Appeal in Murder Case Civil Dispute with Criminal Elements Cannot Be Quashed Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.: Karnataka High Court Issuance of Summons Under Section 91 CrPC During Preliminary Verification is Without Jurisdiction: High Court of J&K and Ladakh Article 21 Prevails Over NDPS Act’s Section 37 Restrictions in Cases of Prolonged Incarceration: Delhi High Court Once a Property is Waqf, It Remains Waqf Perpetually: Calcutta High Court Affirms No Secular Ownership Can Derive from Waqf Properties Surveillance Without Opportunity to Object Violates Articles 14, 19, and 21: Allahabad High Court Quashes Class-B History Sheets Mandatory Provisions of Order XXI CPC Were Violated, Rendering the Auction Sale Illegal: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Validity of Contested Will: “No Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding the Execution of the Will”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has overturned the decision of the First Appellate Court, thereby upholding the validity of a contested will. The case involved a dispute over the ownership of agricultural land, originally owned by Ajmer Singh, who had passed away. The legal battle was between Pritam Kaur, represented by her legal heirs, and the children of Ajmer Singh’s sister, Gurdial Kaur.

Justice Manisha Batra, presiding over the case, stated, “The appellant Smt. Pritam Kaur who was the propounder of the Will in question had produced sufficient, cogent and convincing evidence on record of such nature which removed all the circumstances which could be considered to be suspicious.” [Para 23]

The High Court meticulously examined the evidence and found that the First Appellate Court had erred in its judgment by considering certain circumstances as “suspicious.” One such circumstance was the non-registration of the will. Justice Batra clarified, “It is well settled proposition of law that a Will cannot be viewed with suspicion only because the propounder had played an active role in execution thereof.” [Para 22]

Another point of contention was the location where the will was executed. The High Court found no issue with the will being executed in the natal village of Pritam Kaur, rather than in the native village of the testator, Ajmer Singh. “This discrepancy cannot be stated to be of such nature on the basis of which even otherwise cogent and convincing statements of the appellant and the attesting witness could be discarded,” said Justice Batra. [Para 23]

The High Court’s decision has significant implications for cases involving contested wills, emphasizing the importance of thorough examination of evidence and circumstances surrounding the execution of a will.

Date of Decision: 27 July 2023

Pritam Kaur (Since deceased) vs Rajinder Singh and others         

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Pritam_Kaur_Vs_Rajinder_27July23_PH.pdf"]

Similar News