you're reading...

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7587-7588 OF 2004 Mahesh Kumar (Dead) By L.Rs. … Appellants versus Vinod Kumar and others … Respondents .The following are not suspicious circumstances on the will deed..

A document commemorating a 1636 conveyance of ...

Image via Wikipedia

  1. In this case, the father executedtwo will deeds. one is Reg.will deed executed earlier . after some years and after changing of equations, he executed another will unregistered one.
  2.  in this will deed, he has not specifically mentioned cancellation of earlier registered will deed but in general terms cancelled the all earlier will deeds.
  3. one of the beneficiary under Reg.will deed filed a declaration suit basing on Reg. will deed , and demanded for possession of his share as it was executed for the 3 sons .
  4. the plaintiff who filed the suit never asked for cancellation of the unregistered will deed executed at later point of time and only pleaded that it was a created one.
  5. in the unregistered will deed, the father gave all his properties to the respondent – one of his son who rendered services to him and to his wife till last.
  6. The Apex court held that the later unregistered will deed is a valid one as upheld by trial court.
  7. since it was the last and final will deed, all earlier will deeds are deemed to be cancelled. unregistered will deed was to be followed as per the wish and will of the testator.
  8. when the signature on the unregistered will deed is admittedly genuine one, it can not be said the will is not proved.
  9. when the attestator deposed that he duly singed in the presence of the testator his omission to say that another attestator came a little bit later, can not be said that the will is surround with a cloud.
  10. when the advocate said that he signed as scribe earlier to the signatures of testator and witnesses in his office does not comes under suspicious circumstances.
  11. when the validity of the later will deed is not challenged by the plaintiff in his suit, it can not be said that the later will deed is surround with suspicious circumstances.
  12. simply because the unregistered will deed specifically not cancelled the registered will deed by name and date , general term or to say casual term that all earlier wills are hereby cancelled  does not amount suspicious circumstances and does not amounts not validly cancelled the earlier will deed.   The apex court basically on one point that non- challenge of later will deed in the suit prayer and another point that the parents were looked after by the beneficiary of the later will deed. and further more it contains the signature of the father as testator enough to say that the later will deed is genuine one.

About advocatemmmohan



6 thoughts on “IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7587-7588 OF 2004 Mahesh Kumar (Dead) By L.Rs. … Appellants versus Vinod Kumar and others … Respondents .The following are not suspicious circumstances on the will deed..

  1. thanks sir i got what am searching for

    Posted by AVADHESH TIWARI | 06/08/2012, 12:43 PM
  2. What u r doing is amazing and is of invaluable utility to litigants as well as practising lawyers.
    My thanks for providing very useful judgments on most vexatious subjects..

    Ram Velagapudi

    Posted by Ram Velagapudi | 07/22/2013, 1:11 AM
  3. Respected Advocate Shri Manmohan jee, we are five objectors in a registered will. The case is at petitioner’s evidence. All witnesses have been examined/cross examined. XXX of propounder is continuing. I wish to seek your senior & valuable opinion/advice as to how to rebut the presumption of due execution arising out of registration of will. Regards anil

    Posted by anil kumar arora | 08/03/2013, 4:53 PM
  4. Respected Shri Manmohan jee,
    I have gone through your very good articles and I am really grateful for the same. I have one question on the will. In a partition suit in Delhi if defendant claims unregistered will to be in his/her favor and plaintiffs and other defendants dispute the same. Can the question of will be decided in this partition suit? What is the course to be followed by defendant in whose favor will is dr?

    Posted by harsh | 01/30/2015, 10:32 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 101,799 hits


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,213 other followers

%d bloggers like this: