9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Citation service and representation in probate proceedings. 2. Genuineness of the will propounded by the opposite party. Detailed Analysis: 1. Citation Service and Representation in Probate Proceedings: The first issue addressed whether citations were served upon the plaintiff, Ramanandi Kuer, and her mother, Thakurani Kuer, and whether they were properly represented in the probate proceedings. The plaintiff claimed that citations were not served, and thus they had no knowledge of the probate proceedings. The District Judge could not definitively find that the citation was not served upon Thakurani Kuer but did not consider it proven that she was served or had knowledge of the application for probate. The High Court emphasized the failure of the plaintiff to examine Awadh Behari, who had acknowledged service of the notices, as fatal to her case. However, the Privy Council found that even if some formality was gone through, it did not provide an opportunity to oppose the grant of probate or require the will to be proved in the presence of the interested parties. The conclusion was that the service, if any, was ineffective, and the first issue was decided in favor of the plaintiff. 2. Genuineness of the Will: The second issue questioned the genuineness of the will propounded by Kalawati Kuer, the widow of Gyan Prakash. The onus of proof depended on the finding of the first issue. Since the citations were not properly served, the defendant had the burden to prove the will's genuineness. The defendant's counsel admitted that if the onus was on them, they could not contend that they had discharged it. The plaintiff succeeded in proving that the will was not genuine. The Privy Council noted several suspicious circumstances, including the lack of registration of the will, the absence of a doctor or lawyer as attesting witnesses, and the actions of Harangi Singh inconsistent with the will's provisions. Additionally, evidence from witnesses suggested that Harangi Singh attempted to fabricate the will. The crucial point was the location of Alak Prakash on the date of the alleged will. The Privy Council agreed with the trial court's finding that Alak Prakash was in Patna, not Bihar, on February 2, 1913, thus concluding that the will was fabricated. Conclusion: The Privy Council advised that the judgment of the High Court be set aside and the judgment of the District Judge be restored, with costs of the appeal to the High Court and of this appeal.
|
