Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.30 seconds)Section 68 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 273 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Section 65 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 90 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Mary Assumption Trinidade Etc. vs Vincent Manuel Trinidade And Ors. on 14 August, 1975
5. The learned senior counsel appearing for the objectors,
opposing the grant of probate, submitted that the petition as framed
was wholly misconceived and not maintainable in law. It was
urged that the petitioner sought probate only in respect of the
property situated in Delhi, though Exhibit PW1/2, the alleged Will
dated 23.04.1984 dealt with various assets situated outside the
territorial jurisdiction of the Court and valued far more than
₹10,000/-. Reliance was placed on Section 273 of the ISA to
contend that probate must be of the entire Will and not of a part
thereof, and that the petition deserved dismissal for want of
Signature Not Verified FAO 206/2004 Page 6 of 42
Signed By:KOMAL
DHAWAN
Signing Date:05.12.2025
14:29:55
territorial jurisdiction. It was urged that the trial court had
erroneously applied the ratio of the decision in Mary A.
Trinidade v. Cincent Trinidade, 1976 RLR 212, which was
confined to a petition for letters of administration and had no
application where an executor is named and probate of the entire
Will is sought.
Yashoda Gupta vs Suniti Goyal & Ors. on 12 April, 2001
27. Reliance on the dictum of Yashoda Gupta (supra), Raja
Ram Singh (supra), Harbans Singh (supra) and Brahmapal
Singh (supra) is equally misplaced. Those cases proceeded on
clear proof of undue influence, dominance of the beneficiary,
suppression of medical records, or exclusion of natural heirs in
Signature Not Verified FAO 206/2004 Page 39 of 42
Signed By:KOMAL
DHAWAN
Signing Date:05.12.2025
14:29:55
circumstances very different from the present. Here, the daughters
admittedly were not residing with or regularly attending to the
testator in his final years, no medical or neurological evidence of
incapacity has been produced by them, though ample opportunity
was available to them. The factual foundation that justified
interference in the cases relied upon by the objectors is wholly
absent in the present matter, rendering those authorities
inapplicable.
H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs B. N. Thimmajamma & Others on 13 November, 1958
26. I also briefly refer to the authorities relied upon by the
objectors. The decisions in Venkatachala Iyengar (supra), Rani
Purnima Debi (supra) and Jaswant Kaur (supra) reiterate the
Signature Not Verified FAO 206/2004 Page 38 of 42
Signed By:KOMAL
DHAWAN
Signing Date:05.12.2025
14:29:55
well-established principle that where genuine and substantial
suspicious circumstances exist, the propounder must remove them
to the satisfaction of the Court. Those judgments, however, turned
on fact situations where the Will itself disclosed inherent
contradictions, unexplained departures from the natural line of
succession, or a demonstrable impairment of the testator's
cognitive faculties. No such foundational infirmity is present here.
In the present case, the evidence of PW-2 and PW-3 establishes a
coherent and consistent account of due execution, and the
suspicious circumstances alleged by the objectors rest on
conjecture rather than material evidence.