Will

Gurdial Singh (D) Vs Jagir Kaur (D) 2025 INSC 866 - Will - Non-Mention Of Wife - Suspicious Circumstance

CaseCiter

17 Jul 2025 • 5 min read

Gurdial Singh (D) Vs Jagir Kaur (D) 2025 INSC 866 - Will - Non-Mention Of Wife - Suspicious Circumstance.pdf

We make notes on all Supreme Court judgments for our subscribers’ community consisting of judges, lawyers and students of law and share it in this website. If you want to access them, you can join the community which costs you just ₹2 per day.

💡

Whether Non- Mention Of The Status Of Wife Or The Reason For Her Disinheritance In The Will A Suspicious Circumstance?

Will -Deprivation of a natural heir, by itself, may not amount to a suspicious circumstance because the whole idea behind execution of the Will is to interfere with the normal line of succession- But prudence requires reason for denying the benefit of inheritance to natural heirs and an absence of it, though not invalidating the Will in all cases, shrouds the disposition with suspicion as it does not give inkling to the mind of the testator to enable the court to judge that the disposition was a voluntary act- When unusual features appear in a Will or unnatural circumstances surround its execution, the Court must undertake a close scrutiny and make an overall assessment of the unusual circumstances before accepting the Will -Non- mention of the status of wife or the reason for her disinheritance in the Will ought not to be examined in insolation but in the light of all attending circumstances of the case. (Para 16-18) [Context: SC upheld HC judgment which disbelieved a Will and observed: Non-mention of Wife or the reasons for her disinheritance in the Will, is an eloquent reminder that the free disposition of the testator was vitiated by the undue influence of the appellant]

Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 63 ; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 68 -A Will has to be proved like any other document subject to the requirements of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, that is examination of at least of one of the attesting witnesses. However, unlike other documents, when a Will is propounded, its maker is no longer in the land of living. This casts a solemn duty on the Court to ascertain whether the Will propounded had been duly proved. Onus lies on the propounder not only to prove due execution but dispel from the mind of the court, all suspicious circumstances which cast doubt on the free disposing mind of the testator. Only when the propounder dispels the suspicious circumstances and satisfies the conscience of the court that the testator had duly executed the Will out of his free volition without coercion or undue influence, would the Will be accepted as genuine - When suspicious circumstance exists, Courts should not be swayed by due execution of the Will alone - Suspected features should not be mere fantasies of a doubting mind - Any and every circumstance is not a “suspicious” circumstance. (Para 11-14)

Suggested Readings: