SISIR KUMAR ROY Vs. AMIYA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dr. Satyaban Roy, M.Sc, M.B., F.R.C.S. (Edin.), D.L.O. (Lond.), lately an M.P., a Hindu governed by Dayabhaga school, died on January 27, 1965, leaving him surviving his sole widow Sm. Amiya Bala Roy. He had no son or any other issue. In case of intestacy his estate would devolve on his widow.

(2.) Dr. Sisir Kumar Roy, a medical practitioner and Nirendra Nath Kerr, a Solicitor, filed a petition on June 20, 1967, for grant of probate of a will dated October 29, 1954, of the deceased claiming to be joint executors and trustees named in the will.

(3.) It appears from the will, which is annex, 'A' to the petition, that there are two attesting witnesses, namely, the said Solicitor, N.N. Kerr and G. Mohiuddin, Curator, Indian Botanic Garden. G. Mohiuddin as one of the attesting witnesses to the will affirmed an affidavit on June 7, 1967, under the provision in Sec. 281 of the Indian Succession Act. The widow of the deceased, Sm. Amiya Bala Roy, filed a caveat on June 8, 1966. An affidavit in support of the caveat was filed by her on June 29, 1967. In the affidavit, she denied and disputed that her husband made or published any will dated October 29, 1954, or on any other date or that her husband appointed the Petitioners as executors or trustees of the said will. It is also denied that the said will was duly executed or that the same could be proved by the purported declaration of G. Mohiuddin as one of 1 the attesting witnesses. Her case is that her husband died intestate. She has also stated that the alleged will is an unnatural will. It was not voluntarily executed by her husband as a result of his own free will or volition. She denied that the said document dated October 29, 1954, is the will or testamentary disposition of the deceased. She also made allegations of undue influence or coercion.