05/04/2023
(Law Point)
A) Onus to prove due ex*****on of the said Will was upon the propounder.
B) Will has to be proved like any other document except as to the special requirements of attestation prescribed by S.63 of the Indian Succession Act.
C) Mere fact that the Defendant has not led any evidence would not by itself absolve the Plaintiff from discharging the burden of proving facts which are to be proved by him.
D) Person whose case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the Court—He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation, costs may also be imposed.
Head Note : Indian Succession Act—Sections 59, 63—Evidence Act—Sections 67 and 68—Testamentary probate suit—Proof of wills—Succession act requires will to be attested by atleast 2 witnesses—Evidence act requires examination of atleast one witness to prove the document of Will—Neither of the two attesting witnesses had come forth to give evidence—Plaintiff has admitted that the cannot infact identify the signature of either of the attesting witnesses—Plaintiff has not been unable to discharge the burden of proving due ex*****on of the said Will—Held, Case putforth by the Plaintiff is indeed highly suspect—Suit dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000. (Para : 1, 8, 13, 15-17)
(Background facts)
Testamentary Suit seeks Probate in respect of a Will, which the Plaintiff propounds as being the last Will and Testament of Deceased—Plaintiff is the son of the deceased—Defendant to the present Suit is the other married daughter of the deceased who has opposed the grant of Probate by filing a Caveat—Main main grounds of challenge is Will is forged and fabricated and is an unnatural Will.
Result : Suit dismissed.
