Niranjan Umeshchandra Joshi .. ... vs Mrudula Jyoti Rao & Ors. .. Respondents on 15 December, 2006
6. Trial Court has relied upon the Supreme Court's decision in
Niranjan Umesh Chandra Joshi Vs. Mridula Jyoti Rao: 2007 (1) AD SC
477 and Surinder Pal Vs. Saraswati Arora (1974) 2 SCC 600 to observe
that where the propounder takes prominent part in the execution of the
Will which confers on him a substantial benefit, that is itself one of the
suspicious circumstances, which must be removed by clear evidence. The
Trial Court concluded that by disowning fourth page of the notarized
FAO 408/2015 Page 3 of 6
Will, petitioner has defeated his entire case which was built on the
alleged notarized Will and that by the Will in question, substantial benefit
stood conferred upon the wife of the Executor and this by itself created
suspicious circumstance. While relying upon various decisions of the
Supreme Court, Trial Court has dismissed the probate petition by holding
that the Will in question is shrouded in suspicion.