A K GOPAL Vs. S VASANTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE caveators/defendants in a testamentary proceeding have appealed questioning the grant of probate of the last Will and Testament of late K. Kulasekaran alias A. K. Sekhar who died on 6th August, 1976. Under the said Will Sekhar bequeathed certain properties to his three daughters appointing two sons-in-law as executors of the Will. THE Will had been deposited in the Bank of Baroda by the testator himself.

(2.) IN response to the citation issued, the appellants who are the sons of the testator A. K. Sekhar contested the case of the bequeath to the daughters only alleging that there was no occasion for the testator to execute the Will in their favou r since he had already gifted jewels and cash to them. They brought on record the fact that in the year 1972, the testator had executed settlement deeds and gifted one house each to his four sons. He never thus, according to them intended to give any property to his daughters and alleged that the Will must have been obtained by the sons-in-law and the daughters exercising undue influence and compulsion upon the testator and that the Will could not have been written by their father with the free mind and without any pressure. They accordingly alleged that the Will appeared to be a fraudulent document got up by the daughters to defeat the rights of the sons. The testator who died four years after the execution of the Will was an Art Director in Film Studios. He had good wealth gained by the learning and profession of Art Director and in the property that he had acquired were five houses with appurtenant grounds in the City of Madras . IN the year 1972 he executed a deed of settlement and gave four houses to his four sons, one house each. More than four years after the gifts deed in favour of the sons, he executed the impugned Will bequeathing the house property in a posh locality of the City of Madras to his three daughters.

(3.) IT has almost became ritualistic for all caveators and defendants in a testemantar y proceeding to allege (1) that the testator had no sound and disposing state of mind, (2) that he acted under undue influence of the beneficiaries under the will or subjected to coercion fraud etc and invariably is every case, the execution of the Will is alleged to be surrounded by suspicious circumstances. This is always so even though there ha s not been one or more circumstances suggesting any suspicion as to the execution of the Will. The Supreme Court has also pointed out in the above judgment that there may be causes in which the execution of the Will may be surrounded by suspicious circumstances and added as follows: "the alleged signature of the testator may be very shaky and doubtful and evidence in support of the propounded case that the signature in question is the signature of the attesto r may not remove the doubt created by the appearance of the signature; the condition of the testator's mind may appear to be very feeble and debilitated; and evidence adduced may not succeed in removing the legitimate doubt as to the mental capacity of the testator; the dispositions made in the Will may appear to be unnatural, improbable or unfair in the light of relevant circumstances; or, the Will may otherwise indicate that the said dispositions may not be the result of the testator's free Will and mind. In such cases the Court would naturally expect that all legitimate suspicions should be completely removed before the document is accepted as the last Will of the testator. The presence of such suspicious circumstances naturally tends to make the initial onus very heavy; and unless it is satisfactorily discharged, Courts would be reluctant to treat the document as the last Will of the testator. IT is true that, if a caveat is filed alleging the exercise of undue influence, fraud or coercion in respect of the execution of the Will propounded, such pleas may have to be proved by the caveator s ; but, even without such pleas circumstances may raise a doubt as to whether the testator was acting of his own free Will in executing the Will, and in such circumstances, it would be a part of the initial onus to remove any such legitimate doubts in the matter. "