Will -- Exclusion of son from property under Will - Relationship between testator and his son got stained in 1984 - This fact is admitted by son of testator - Son also filed a partition suit against his father/testator - Testator was alive for nearly 11 years after execution of Will - On account of close relationship, testator after death of his brother wanted to protect..........
Will -- Suspicious circumstances - Will bears the date 15.01.1999 however same was registered on 13.01.1999 - No explanation forthcoming for said discrepancy except that same was a typographical mistake - One of attesting witnesses of Will was not even able to identify his thumb impression on Will - No reasons given in Will for disinheriting natural heirs by testator -..........
Will -- Probate - Will was neither registered nor notarized - One of attesting witnesses to Will was Court clerk of Advocate who prepared Will - Petitioner himself admitted that testator suffered from depression - Testator expired barely a month after the Will was executed - Petitioner failed to satisfy Court that Will was signed by testator out of his own free Will or..........
Will -- Proof of - Attesting witness of Will not examined by plaintiff, as plaintiff claimed that defendants admitted the Will - However, defendants in their written statement stated that Will was not executed by testatrix - Examination of attesting witness cannot be dispensed with as S.68 of Evidence Act is mandatory for proving Will - Will in question not proved...........
Will -- Probate - None of attesting witnesses of Will were examined - But attending witness of Will was examined who categorically stated that he was present at the residence of testatrix and in his presence testatrix and attesting witnesses of Will have put their signature in said last Will and testament - There is no circumstances appears to say any suspicious in the..........
Evidence Act, 1872, Section 68, 71 -- Will - Proof of - Mere summoning of one of attesting witnesses in proof of testament, who turned hostile to the due execution alone is not sufficient to make the succeeding provision S.71 of the Act operative, for which, propounder has to show that it has become impossible to prove the testament under the special provision S.68 of the..........
Will -- Suspicious circumstance - Five cases of forging documents pending against attesting witness of Will, making it sufficient to believe him as an unreliable attesting witness - Moreover, defendant in whose favour Will is alleged to be executed impleaded plaintiff in another litigation based on natural succession - Will in question thus, surrounded by suspicious..........
Mutation -- Attesting witnesses - Ten different mutations have been attested and in all these mutations same persons have been cited as witnesses - Even, the ink used by these witnesses is similar in all mutations and ink in which respondent No.2 purported to have signed on mutations is also of same nature - All this raises a genuine suspicion relating to matter in which..........
Will -- Proof of - Plaintiff contended that his grandmother after cancelling earlier Will in favour of defendants executed Will in his favour - However, attesting witness of Will in favour of plaintiff stated that testatrix was not in her sound state of mind at the time of execution of Will - Serious doubt arises as to why testatrix just before her death has chosen to..........
Will -- Proof of - No condition in S.63 of Succession Act, of affixing signature by attesting witness on direction of testator, much less as a mandatory requirement has been held to be necessary to make Will admissible in evidence...........
