Delhi District Court
Dr. Karan Singh vs The State on 26 August, 2014
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH : ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
(WEST)02, TIS HAZARI COURTS:DELHI
Probate Case No. 112/10/07
Unique ID Case No. 02401C1212872007
Dr. Karan Singh
S/o Sh. Dharam Singh
R/o 9/2262, Street No. 10
Kailash Nagar,
Delhi110031 ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State
2. Sh. Raghbir Singh
S/o late Sh. Ranjit Singh
3. Smt. Nirmala Devi
W/o Sh. Raghbir Singh
4. Sh. Vikram
S/o Sh. Raghbir Singh.
All R/o : A235, Sudershan Park
New Delhi. ... Respondents
Date of institution of the case 03.12.2007
Date on which, judgment have been reserved 12.08.2014
Date of pronouncement of judgment26.08.2014
PC No. 112/10/07 1/12
2
JUDGMENT:
The present petition u/s 276 of Indian Succession Act for grant of probate in respect of the Will dated 16.09.2000 of late Sh. Ranjeet Singh has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.
2. Brief facts as made out from the petition are that late Sh. Ranjeet Singh S/o Sh. Solu Ram had bequeathed and devised his immovable property bearing No. A235, Sudershan Park, Moti Nagar, New Delhi measuring 100 sq yards and property bearing plot no. 112, part of khasra no. 221/9, situated in the layout plan of village Sakrawati in the abadi of Arjun Park, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi by virtue of his last Will dated 16.09.2000 in favour of the petitioner. It is stated that deceased further bequeathed and devised in the said Will that after his demise, his movable assets and properties including saving bank a/c no. 34900 with Punjab National Bank, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi shall firstly go to his wife Smt. Pista Devi and after her demise, the same shall go and devolve to the present petitioner exclusively. It is further stated that deceased Sh. Ranjeet Singh was the absolute owner of property bearing No. A235, Sudershan Park, Moti Nagar, New Delhi measuring 100 sq yards and property bearing plot no. 112, part of khasra no. 221/9, situated in the layout plan of village Sakrawati in the abadi of Arjun Park, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi and the said properties were the self acquired properties of Sh. Ranjeet Singh and he was competent to deal with the same in any manner whatsoever he like and to execute his last Will dated 16.09.2000 in favour of the petitioner and the deceased PC No. 112/10/07 2/12 3 was possessing sound and disposing state of mind at the time of execution of the said Will. It is stated that deceased Sh. Ranjeet Singh has expired on 28.02.2001 at Delhi and he was married to Smt. Pista Devi and from their wedlock, no issue was born and Smt. Pista Devi has also since expired on 14.10.2007 at Delhi. It is further stated that Sh. Ranjeet Singh was the real uncle of the petitioner and the petitioner looked after the deceased and his wife till their demise and that deceased has left behind his nephew i.e petitioner and there has been no other legal heirs/relations left behind by the deceased. It is stated that after the demise of Sh. Ranjeet Singh, the petitioner has inherited and became absolute owner/beneficiary of the above mentioned immovable properties as well as the movable assets. It is also stated that the above said Will dated 16.09.2000 is duly registered with office of the Sub Registrar, Seelampur, Delhi vide document no. 25559 in Book No. 3, Volume No. 3735 on pages 36 to 37 and the same is genuine and it has been prayed that the Probate in respect of the properties of the deceased may be granted in favour of the petitioner under the terms of the Will dated 16.09.2000.
3. Upon filing of the present petition, the notices of the same were issued to respondents.
It is pertinent to mention here that an application u/o 1 rule 10 CPC for impleadment was moved on behalf of the applicants Sh. Raghbir Singh, Smt.Nirmala Devi and Sh. Vikram and the said application was allowed and the applicants Sh. Raghbir Singh, Smt. Nirmala Devi and Sh. Vikram were ordered to PC No. 112/10/07 3/12 4 be impleaded as respondent nos. 2 to 4 in this matter vide order dated 26.09.2008 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
4. The objections have been filed on behalf of the respondent/objectors namely Sh. Raghbir Singh, Smt. Nirmala Devi and Sh. Vikram, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has suppressed/concealed the material facts and did not disclose that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh was suffering from throat cancer during his lifetime and was under the treatment from different hospitals. It is further stated that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh was working as an UDC in Steels & Mines, Govt. of India and was holder of CGHS Medical facilities and received treatment in the different hospitals. It is stated that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh was not in a sound disposition of his mind at the time of execution of the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000. It is stated that Sh. Ranjit Singh died on 28.02.2001 without executing any Will and after the death of Sh. Ranjit Singh, Smt. Pista Devi and Sh. Raghbir Singh inherited the property bearing no. A235, Sudershan Park, Delhi intestate. It is further stated that the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 of Sh. Ranjit Singh is forged, fabricated and manipulated by the petitioner. It is stated that property no. A235, Sudershan Park, Delhi originally belonged to Sh. Ranjit Singh and the property i.e. plot no. 112, Khasra no. 22/9 situated in village Sakarawati in the abadi of Arjun Park, Najafgarh, New Delhi was owned by Smt. Pista Devi and she sold the same in her lifetime. It is further stated that late Smt. Pista Devi became the owner of the property bearing no. A235, Sudershan Park, New Delhi after the death of her husband and Sh. Raghbir PC No. 112/10/07 4/12 5 Singh did not raise any objection for the same during her lifetime. It is stated that Smt. Pista Devi during her lifetime, made a Will in favour of Smt. Nirmala Devi and Sh. Vikram thereby bequeathing the property bearing no. A235, Sudershan Park, New Delhi in their favour and they have already filed a case for grant of probate on the basis of the said Will executed by Smt. Pista Devi on 18 th September, 2007. It is further stated that the petitionerDr. Karan Singh did not disclose regarding the execution of the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 by Sh. Ranjit Singh during the lifetime of Smt. Pista Devi, who expired on 14 th October, 2007 almost after six years from the death of Sh. Ranjit Singh. It is stated that Sh. Ranjit Singh was living with the objectors since the objector no.1 is the adopted son of late Sh.Ranjit Singh and after the death of late Sh. Ranjit Singh, all the objectors looked after and took the care of his wife Smt. Pista Devi , who happens to be the mother of Sh. Raghbir Singh who is the adopted son of Sh. Ranjit Singh. It is stated that the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 is a forged and fabricated document and does not give any right and title to the petitioner in the estate of deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh. It is submitted that late Smt. Pista Devi was legally wedded wife of Sh. Ranjit Singh, who died intestate and after his death, the property no. A235, Sudershan Park, New Delhi was inherited by Smt. Pista Devi and by way of Will dated 18.09.2007, the objector nos. 2 & 3 have inherited the above said property and have become absolute owner of the said property. All other averments made in the petition have also been denied by the objector/respondents and it has been prayed that the present petition filed by the petitioner may be dismissed with costs.
PC No. 112/10/07 5/12 6
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 08.04.2009 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
ISSUES :
1. Whether the Will dated 16.09.2000 executed by Sh. Ranjeet Singh is legal, valid and duly executed by him in sound disposing mind?
OPP
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of Probate of this Will, as prayed for? OPP.
3. Relief.
6. In his PE, the petitionerDr. Karan Singh has examined himself as PW1.
7. In their RE, the respondent/objectors have examined respondent/ objector Smt. Nirmala Devi as RW1.
8. I have heard the arguments put forward by Ld. counsels for the petitioner & respondents and have carefully gone through the record of the case. I have also carefully considered the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner and respondents.
9. The findings on the issues are as under : PC No. 112/10/07 6/12 7
10. Issue Nos. 1 & 2 :
Issue Nos. 1 & 2 are being taken up together as both these issues are interconnected and have to be decided on the basis of same evidence.
The onus to prove the issue nos. 1 & 2 was upon the petitioner and in order to discharge the said onus, the petitionerDr. Karan Singh has examined himself as PW1 and filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. P1), wherein it has been stated that late Sh. Ranjit Singh had bequeathed and devised his movable property bearing A235, Sudershan Park, Moti Nagar, New Delhi and property bearing plot no. 112, part of khasra no. 221/9, situated in layout plan of Sakrawati in the abadi of Arjun Park, Najafgarh, New Delhi and his movable assets in his favour by virtue of Will dated 16.09.2000 and the said Sh. Ranjit Singh was the absolute owner of the said property which were his self acquired property. PW1 further deposed that at the time of execution the above said Will, Sh. Ranjit Singh was possessing sound and disposing state of mind and he died on 28.02.2001 at Delhi. PW1 deposed that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh was married to Sh. Pista Devi and from their wedlock, no issue was born and Smt. Pista Devi also expired on 14.10.2007 at Delhi and after their demise, he has inherited and became absolute owner /beneficiary of the above said property of the deceased. PW1 further deposed that above said Will dated 16.09.2000 was duly registered with office of the Sub Registrar, Seelampur, Delhi vide document no. 25559 in Book No. 3, Volume No. 3735 on pages 36 to 37 and the same was genuine and duly witnessed by the attesting witnesses and it was the last and final Will executed by deceased PC No. 112/10/07 7/12 8 Sh. Ranjit Singh.
11. In their RE, the respondent/objectors have examined RW1 Smt.Nirmala Devi, who has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. R1), wherein it has been stated that she was the wife of Sh. Raghbir Singh, who was the adopted son of Sh. Ranjit Singh and the said Sh. Ranjit Singh died on 28.02.2001 without executing any Will and he left behind his wife Smt. Pista Devi and adopted son Sh. Raghbir Singh, who inherited the property bearing no. A235, Sudershan Park, Delhi. RW1 further deposed that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh did not execute any Will and the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 is forged, fabricated and manipulated by the petitioner. RW1 deposed that property A235, Sudershan Park, Delhi was owned by Sh. Ranjit Singh and the other property i.e. bearing plot no. 112, part of khasra no. 221/9, situated in layout plan of Sakrawati in the abadi of Arjun Park, Najafgarh, New Delhi was owned by Smt. Pista Devi and she sold the same in her lifetime. RW1 deposed that during her lifetime, Smt. Pista Devi executed a Will in her favour and in favour of her son namely Vikram thereby bequeathing property A235, Sudershan Park, Delhi in their favour and they are in exclusive possession of the said property since the death of Smt. Pista Devi. RW1 deposed that the petitioner Dr. Karan Singh did not disclose the execution of the alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 during the lifetime of Smt. Pista Devi, who expired on 14.10.2007 almost six years after the death of Sh. Ranjit Singh. RW1 further deposed that deceased Sh. Ranjit Singh was living with them and they were looking after him and after his PC No. 112/10/07 8/12 9 death, they also looked after his wife Smt. Pista Devi, who happens to the mother of Sh. Raghbir Singh. RW1 also stated that alleged Will dated 16.09.2000 filed by the petitioner is forged and fabricated document and the signatures of the testator are forged on the said Will.
12. The present petition u/s 276 of Indian Succession Act for grant of probate in respect of the Will dated 16.09.2000 executed by late Sh. Ranjeet Singh has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and as such the petitioner was required to prove the said Will on record in accordance with law.
It is pertinent to note here that Section 63 of Indian Succession Act deals with execution of unprivileged Wills and it provides that every testator, not being a soldier employed in an expedition or engaged in actual warfare [or an airman so employed or engaged,] or an mariner at sea, shall execute his Will according to the following rules:
(a) The testator shall sign or shall affix his mark to the Will, or it shall be signed by some other person in his presence and by his direction.
(b) The signature or mark of the testator, or the signature of the person signing for him, shall be so placed that it shall appear that it was intended thereby to give effect to the writing as a Will.
(c) The Will shall be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom has seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the Will or has been some other person sign the Will, in the presence and by the direction of the testator, or has received PC No. 112/10/07 9/12 10 from the testator a personal acknowledgment of his signatures or mark, or of the signature of such other person; and each of the witnesses shall sign the Will in the presence of the testator, but it shall not be necessary that more than one witness be present at the same time, and no particular form of attestation shall be necessary.
In these circumstances, in view of the provisions of Section63 of Indian Succession Act, it is evident that a Will is required to be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom has seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the Will and the said attesting witness should also have signed the Will in the presence and by the direction of the testator.
13. Further, section 68 of Indian Evidence Act deals with proof of execution of documents required by law to be attested and it reads as under :
68. Proof of execution of documents required by law to be attested : If a document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for the purpose of proving its execution, if there be an attesting witness alive, and subject to the process of the Court and capable of giving evidence.
Provided that it shall not be necessary to call an
attesting witness in proof of the execution of any
document, not being a Will, which has been registered in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 ( 16 of 1908 ) , unless its execution by the PC No. 112/10/07 10/12 11 person by whom it purports to have been executed is specifically denied.
In view of the above provisions of section68 of Indian Evidence Act , it is clear that a Will can be proved on record only by examining atleast one of its attesting witnesses.
The perusal of the record reveals that the Will in question dated 16.9.2000 executed by the deceased Sh. Ranjeet Singh has been attested by two witnesses namely Sh. Jai Singh Patodia and Sh. Anil Kumar Mishra.
The perusal of the record further reveals that none of these two attesting witnesses namely Sh. Jai Singh Patodia and Sh. Anil Kumar Mishra have been examined by the petitioner to prove the above said Will dated 16.9.2000 on record in accordance with law. The only witness examined on behalf of the petitioner in this case is the petitioner himself i.e PW1 Sh. Karan Singh, who in his cross examination has specifically stated that he was not present at Delhi at the time of execution and registration of the Will, Ex. PW1/1.
Thus, in view of the above discussion & observations and in view of the material on record, the petitioner has failed to prove on record that the Will dated 16.09.2000 executed by Sh. Ranjeet Singh is legal, valid and duly executed by him in sound disposing mind and as such the petitioner is not entitled for grant of Probate of the said Will, as prayed for in this petition.
Hence, in view of the above, issue nos. 1&2 are decided against the petitioner.
PC No. 112/10/07 11/12 12
14. RELIEF In view of the above findings on the aforesaid issue nos. 1 & 2, the present petition u/s 276 of Indian Succession Act for grant of probate filed on behalf of the petitioner is hereby dismissed.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open ) (Paramjit Singh)
(Court on 26.8.2014) ADJ02 (West)
Tis Hazari Courts Delhi
26.8.2014
PC No. 112/10/07 12/12
13
PC No.112/10/07
26.8.2014
Present : None
Vide separate judgment, announced in the open court, the present petition for the grant of probate has been dismissed.
File be consigned to record room.
(Announced in the open ) (Paramjit Singh)
(court on 26.8.2014) ADJ02 (West)
Tis Hazari Courts Delhi
26.8.2014
PC No. 112/10/07 13/12