Legal Reference Library

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Rampali vs The State Govt of NCT of Delhi, has reiterated that nomination is not a Will in law and in the absence of any Will, only legal heirs (as per the Hindu Succession Act) shall be entitled to inherit the property of the deceased. In the present case, an appeal was filed to revoke the trial court’s order of dismissal of Rampali’s (deceased’s sister) succession certificate. Justice Valmiki J Mehta noted that the trial court had rightly awarded the succession certificate to the husband and daughter of Kamla Devi (the deceased), who were her legal heirs according to the Hindu Succession Act. The revocation was prayed for on the grounds that Kamla Devi had not been residing with her husband and daughter for over 35 years and that Rampali was shown to be her nominee in her government employment records. The opinion of the trial court noting that the revocation was right in light of Section 15(1)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act, was upheld by t...

The Supreme Court, in Dr KS Palanisami vs Hindu community in general and citizens of Gobichettipalayam, has observed that courts are not entitled to ignore clear words or add something of its own or dilute the meaning of any clear word used in the Will. In the instant case, a Will was executed mutually and jointly by a husband and wife, wherein they intended to set apart the property for charity. One of the clauses in the Will provided that on the death of any of the spouse, the survivor shall enjoy the entire properties absolutely with all the rights. The husband died and later the wife had alienated some of the properties. The high court, declaring these transfers as null and void, had opined that the expression ‘absolutely’ in the Will should be read to mean that the surviving testator would have only the life interest.  In this context, an apex court bench comprising Justice AK Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan observed: “The solemn duty of the court is to find out the i...

It is well-known that the proof of wills presents a recurring topic for decision in courts and there are a large number of judicial pronouncements on the subject. The party propounding a will or otherwise making a claim under a will is no doubt seeking to prove a document and, in deciding how it is to be proved, we must inevitably refer to the statutory provisions which govern the proof of documents. #  Will Sections 67 and 68 of the  Evidence Act  are relevant for this purpose. Under Section 67, if a document is alleged to be signed by any person, the signature of the said person must be proved to be in his handwriting, and for proving such a handwriting under Sections 45 and 47 of the Act the opinions of experts and of persons acquainted with the handwriting of the person concerned are made relevant. Section 68 deals with the proof of the execution of the document required by law to be attested; and it provides that such a document shall not be used as eviden...

The Supreme Court in Madhuri Ghosh vs. Debobroto Dutta, has reiterated the legal position that where an absolute bequest has been made in respect of certain property to certain persons in a Will, then a subsequent bequest made qua the same property later in the same Will to other persons will be of no effect. In his Will, the testator had bequeathed the property in favour of the widow and the elder daughter. Before the court, it was contended that the said bequeath is only a limited interest and that the Will should be read as a whole and that the testator’s intention should be given effect so that the grandchildren are “not on the road”. Though the said argument found favour in the trial court as well as high court, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justice RK Agrawal and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman rejected the same in view of the dictum laid down in Ramkishorelal and Another vs. Kamal Narayan. In Ramkishorelal case, the apex court held thus: “An attempt should always be made to rea...

The Supreme Court in Nitu vs. Sheela Rani, has held that family pension does not form part of the estate of the deceased and it is to be given under the provisions of the relevant pension scheme. The high court, in this case, had held that the mother of deceased employee was entitled to the succession certificate in view of the provisions of Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, as she was also one of the heirs to the deceased employee. The widow of the deceased approached the apex court against this order, which held that the mother should also get 50 per cent share in the pension. Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/family-pension-not-part-anyones-estate-disposed-will-sc/

[2015(2) CIVIL COURT CASES 100 = 2015(2) HLR 172] PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT (SNEH PRASHAR, J.) SURINDER SINGH (SINCE DECEASED AND NOW REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS) Appellant  VERSUS PIARA SINGH Respondent  R.S.A. No. 1498 of 1986 Decided on 16-11-2014. (A) Evidence Act, 1872, Section 69 - Will - Proof of Will – When attesting witnesses not found – Held that, it becomes incumbent upon the propounder of the Will to prove two facts (i) that the attestation of one attesting witness atleast was in his handwriting; and (ii) that the signatures of the executant is in his handwriting.  (Para 13)  (B) Evidence Act, 1872, Section 68 – Succession Act, 1925, Section 63(c) - Will – Proof of Execution - Suspicious Circumstances - A Will is not a document which can be admitted in evidence without complying with the provisions specifically stipulated for proving the same - Factum of existence of the Will brought to light by the plaintiffs only when the...