10 Ultra-Hard Case Studies – Indian Succession Act

Posted on March 7, 2026 by Admin

10 Ultra-Hard Case Studies – Indian Succession Act

1. Suspicious Circumstances and Proof of Will

Problem

A 85-year-old testator executed a will two weeks before his death. The entire property was given to his nephew who drafted the will and brought the witnesses. Natural heirs (two daughters) were excluded. The will was registered. The daughters challenge the will alleging suspicious circumstances.

Whether the will can be accepted?

Answer

Registration of a will does not remove suspicious circumstances.

In H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma (AIR 1959 SC 443) the Supreme Court held that:

Propounder must prove due execution under Section 63
Suspicious circumstances must be fully explained

Suspicious circumstances here include:

Beneficiary drafting the will
Exclusion of natural heirs
Testator’s old age

Similarly in Bharpur Singh v. Shamsher Singh (2009) 3 SCC 687, the Court held that active participation of beneficiary creates suspicion.

Thus the nephew must prove:

Testator’s sound mind
Independent attesting witnesses
Voluntary execution

If suspicion remains unresolved, probate must be refused.

2. Attestation by Witnesses

Problem

A will was signed by the testator and two witnesses. However, during trial only one attesting witness was examined, although the second witness was alive and available.

Is the will proved?

Answer

Section 68 of the Evidence Act requires at least one attesting witness to prove execution.

However, the Supreme Court in
Yumnam Ongbi Tampha Ibema Devi v. Yumnam Joykumar Singh (2009) 4 SCC 780
held that the witness examined must prove all elements of attestation under Section 63.

Thus the witness must depose that:

Testator signed the will
Both witnesses signed in the presence of the testator

If the witness fails to prove these elements, the will is not proved.

3. Will Executed During Serious Illness

Problem

A testator suffering from terminal illness executed a will in hospital leaving property to a distant relative instead of his sons.

Sons challenge the will alleging lack of testamentary capacity.

Answer

Testamentary capacity depends on mental condition at the time of execution.

In
Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur (1977) 1 SCC 369,
the Supreme Court held that illness alone does not invalidate a will unless it affects mental capacity.

Court must examine:

Medical evidence
Testimony of witnesses
Conduct of testator

If the testator understood the nature and consequences of the will, it is valid.

4. Beneficiary Acting as Attesting Witness

Problem

A will bequeaths a house to X. X also signed the will as an attesting witness.

Whether the bequest is valid?

Answer

Under Section 67 of the Indian Succession Act, a bequest to an attesting witness is void, though the will itself remains valid.

The rationale is to prevent conflict of interest.

Thus:

The will remains valid
The gift to the witness becomes void

5. Probate Court Jurisdiction

Problem

In probate proceedings the defendant argued that the property mentioned in the will actually belonged to him and not to the testator.

Should the probate court decide ownership?

Answer

No.

In
Mahesh Kumar v. Vinod Kumar (2012) 4 SCC 387
the Supreme Court held:

Probate court only determines whether the will is genuine.

Questions of title or ownership must be decided in a separate civil suit.

Thus probate proceedings are limited in scope.

6. Multiple Wills

Problem

A testator executed a will in 2010 and another will in 2018 distributing property differently. Both wills are produced in court.

Which will prevails?

Answer

The last valid will revokes earlier wills.

Section 70 of the Indian Succession Act recognizes revocation by execution of another will.

The court must verify:

Valid execution of the later will
Testamentary capacity
Absence of suspicious circumstances

If proved valid, the 2018 will supersedes the 2010 will.

7. Will Found After Death

Problem

After the death of the testator, a will was discovered in the cupboard of the beneficiary. The family alleges fabrication.

How should the court evaluate the will?

Answer

Custody of the will is an important factor.

In
Gurdev Kaur v. Kaki (2007) 1 SCC 546,
the Court held that suspicious custody of the will may require stricter scrutiny.

The propounder must prove:

Authentic execution
Natural circumstances
Credible witness testimony

If doubts persist, the will may be rejected.

8. Handwritten Will without Registration

Problem

A handwritten will executed by the testator was never registered. The heirs challenge it saying registration is mandatory.

Answer

Registration of will is not compulsory.

In
Narain Singh v. Kamla Devi (AIR 2003 SC 344),
the Supreme Court held that an unregistered will can be valid if properly proved.

Thus validity depends on:

Execution
Attestation
Testamentary capacity

9. Conditional Will

Problem

A testator states in his will that his property will go to his nephew only if the nephew takes care of him during his lifetime. The nephew fails to care for him.

Does the nephew inherit the property?

Answer

A conditional will operates only if the condition is fulfilled.

If the condition fails, the bequest fails.

Courts interpret conditions strictly to determine the intention of the testator.

Thus the nephew cannot claim the property.

10. Forged Signature Allegation

Problem

Heirs challenge a will alleging that the signature of the testator is forged.

How should the court determine authenticity?

Answer

Court may rely on:

Handwriting expert
Attesting witnesses
Circumstantial evidence

In H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma,
the Supreme Court emphasized that proof of signature and attestation must satisfy the judicial conscience of the court.

Thus the propounder must establish: