SATYA PAL GOPAL DAS Vs. PANCHU BALA DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nrisingha Prosad Das was a well to do person, a Zamindar and a businessman, of Katwa. His only son, Surya Narayana Das died on April 1, 1935 leaving behind a child-less widow Panchu Bala Dasi. A few days later, he lost his only other issue, a daughter. Shortly after the death of his two children, he came into touch with Binapani, wife of Satya Gopal Das, who became his mistress. A son Ramendra Narayan Das was born to Binapani on February 1, 1936. There is a question whether Ramendra Narayan is the illegitimate son of Nrisingha Prosad Das or the son of Satya Gopal Das. But the undoubted fact remains that almost right from his birth, Ramendra Narayan Das was brought up as a child of the family of Nrisingha Prosad Das and it was round this child that the entire life of the family revolved. Not only Nrisingha Prosad Des, but also his wife Kali Dasi and daughter-in-law Panchu Bala Dasi lavished their love and affection on him, though there was some suggestion and argument in the lower court that the love and affection showered on Ramendra Narayan Des was superficial. It is no longer disputed before us that Ramendra Narayan Das was greatly and genuinely loved by all the members of the family, that is, Nrisingha Prosad Das, his wife, Kali Dasi and his daughter-in-law, Panchu Bala Dasi. That he was so dearly loved and treated with great affection is clear from the series of letters written by Nrisingha Prosad Das, Kali Dasi and Panchu Bala Dasi Exhibits 2(a) to 2(z) and 2(z) series. Nrisingha Prosad Das died on March 12, 1950. His widow Kali Dasi died on January 8, 1951. On February 1, 1954, Satya Gopal Das propounded a will said to have been executed by Nrisingha Prosad Das on June 21, 1946 and registered on June 30, 1946. By this will the testator purported to give all his properties including those which he claimed to have purchased benami in the names of his wife and daughter-in-law to Ramendra Narayan Das. It was mentioned in the will that he had given sufficient amounts of cash to his wife and daughter-in-law for their comfortable maintenance and pilgrimages. The will contained (a) lengthy schedule of properties and it is sufficient at this juncture to say that every page of the will contains the signature of Nrisingha Prosad Das. The will was written by Bharat Chandra Das (OPW-4) and bears the attestation of Kali Dasi (deceased widow), Panchu Bala Dasi (OPW- 13), Pashupati Mondal (PW-I), Kalipada Das (PW-5) and Satyendra Nath Mullick (OPW-9). We may mention here that Pashupati Mondal and Kalipada Das were the trusted employees of Nrisingha Prosad Das, as apparent from the letters Exhibits 2(a) to 2(z) and 2(z) series. Satyendra Nath Mullick was the private tutor employed by Nrisingha Prosad Das for the boy Ramendra Narayan Das. Satya Gopal Das sought probate of the will and filed Will case No. 1/62/7 of 1957/1954 (1953/54 ) in the court of the Additional District Judge, Burdwan. The suit was contested by Panchu Bala Dasi. Various pleas were raised and voluminous evidence was let in. After a consideration of the entire evidence, probate was granted with a. copy of the will annexed. Panchu Bala Dasi preferred an appeal to the High Court of Calcutta. The appeal was allowed by Purushottam Chatterjee and A. C. Seri, JJ. by two separate judgments. The grant of probate was set aside. Satya Gopal Das obtained a certificate under Art. 133(1)(a) of the Constitution to prefer an appeal to this court and the appeal is now before us.

(2.) We are far from satisfied that the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of the Trial Court. Such suspicious circumstances, as the High Court was able to point out, were more than dispelled by certain outstanding features of the case which we shall presently enumerate. The most suspicious circumstance, according to the High Court, was that the two signatures, purporting to be those of Kali Dasi and Panchu Bala Dasi on the will, were not or did not appear to be those of Kali Dasi and Punchubala Dasi. The other important circumstance, according to the High Court, was that the will did not make any provision for Kali Dasi and Panchu Bala Dasi. Not only did it not make any provision, even the properties purchased in their names were included in the will as the properties of Nrisingha Prosad Das and bequeathed to Ramendra Narayan Das.

(3.) As we said there are certain outstanding features of the case which should dispel all suspicion that may possibly otherwise attach itself to the will. The will was registered on June 30, 1946 and the testator died on March 12, 1950. That is to say, the testator lived for nearly four years after the execution and registration of the will and yet he took no steps to have the will cancelled or to revoke it. It could not be that the will was somehow brought into existence and the signatures of Nrisingha Prosad Das were obtained on the will by practising some fraud. The endorsements on the will show that Nrisingha Prosad Das himself had presented the will for registration to the Sub Registrar and that the Sub Registrar had been called to the residence of Nrisingha Prosad Das for the purpose of registering the will. Nrisingha Prosad Das affixed his signature twice again in, the presence of the Sub Registrar, as shown by the endorsements. The endorsements also show that execution was admitted by Nrisingha Prosad Das. As earlier mentioned by us, every page of the will has been signed by Nrisingha Prosad Das and at the foot of the will, a note listing the various corrections made has also been signed by Nrisingha Prosad Das. Therefore, there cannot even be the slightest doubt that the document was executed by Nrisingha Prosad Das, that its execution was admitted by Nrisingha Prosad Das before the Sub Registrar and that Nrisingha Prosad Das himself presented it to the Sub Registrar having called him to his own residence for that purpose. It is in the background of these outstanding circumstances that we have to consider the further questions whether the signatures purporting to be those of the attesting witnesses are in fact theirs and whether these signatures were made in the presence of the testator Also whether the testator signed the will in the, presence of the attestors In considering these questions, it is necessary to bear in mind the following recital in the will: