Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.18 seconds)
Smt. Khumukcham Ningol Chandam Ongbi ... vs Khumumchan Bishwasakha Singh And Anr. on 21 January, 1999 cites

H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs B. N. Thimmajamma & Others on 13 November, 1958

13. The testator is a retired Govt. servant. He did not have a son and he treated the plaintiff as his son. Thus, it is quite natural that he wanted to give some of the properties to the plaintiff after his death by making a Will. It has been found and noted above that the testator was in mentally sound and disposing state of mind as proved by the evidence of the witnesses including the Doctors. There has been slight defects in the statement of one of the attesting witnesses i.e. PW-5 due to the fact that he was an old man, 85 years old at the time of giving his statement before the Commissioner as he was examined on Commission issued by the Court. Thus, due to loss of memory, he might have committed some slight defects in his incoherent statement which is quite natural. Regarding the mode of proving of a Will the Supreme Court in the case of H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N.Thimmajamma reported in AIR 1959 SC 443 held that as in the case of proof of other documents so in the case of proof of Wills it would be idle to expect proof with mathematical certainty. The test to be applied would be the usual test of the satisfaction of the prudent mind in such matters. Though in the same case, the Supreme Court further held that other factors like surrounding circumstances including that existence of suspicious circumstances, if any, should be clearly explained and dispelled by the propounder.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 1203 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document
1