In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has clarified the procedural route for proving the execution of documents requiring attestation under law, especially wills. The Court held that while Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act mandates examination of at least one attesting witness to prove execution, Section 69 provides an alternative method when such witnesses are unavailable.
The verdict was delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar in the case of Dr. K.R. Leela Devi v. K.R. Rajaram and Ors. (RFA No. 715 of 2013).
The case arose from a partition suit filed by Dr. Leela Devi against her brothers and nieces/nephews over family properties. The dispute centered around whether a residential property (plaint B schedule) could be excluded from partition based on a will allegedly executed by their mother, late Smt. Bhavani.
The appellant contended that the Will was suspicious, the attesting witnesses were not examined, and their mother lacked testamentary capacity due to age and illness. In contrast, the first defendant relied on a registered Will and evidence from the scribe (DW5), asserting the Will was genuine and executed with full awareness.
“Mere registration of the Will does not absolve the propounder from the obligation to prove the Will as required by law.”
— Kerala High Court
The Court emphasized that the propounder has a duty to dispel all suspicious circumstances and must show that the testator was of sound mind, understood the document, and signed it voluntarily.
Read Also:- Suo Motu PIL: Kerala High Court Questions Legitimacy of IHRD Director’s Appointment
In this case, the original Will was untraceable, but a photocopy and other registration records were available. The attesting witnesses were unavailable as they had died. DW5, who prepared the Will, confirmed in court that the Will was executed in the presence of the testator and the attestors. He also testified that the Will was presented for registration and identified the signatures.
The Court held:
“If the propounder succeeds in proving that the attesting witnesses are dead, the Will can be proved by establishing that the signature of the executant and the attestation by at least one witness are in their respective handwritings.”
It cited C.G. Raveendran v. C.G. Gopi (2015) and Haradhan Mahatha v. Dukhu Mahatha (1993) to affirm that such evidence is sufficient to meet the requirements under Section 69.
On the issue of stock witnesses, the Court rejected the argument that their routine involvement made the Will invalid. It relied on V. Kalaivani v. M.R. Elangovan (2024) to hold that attestation by such witnesses, without more, does not cast suspicion on the Will’s validity.
Regarding the testatrix's mental state, despite claims of illness, no medical records were produced by the plaintiff—herself a doctor. The Court found that photographic evidence and witness testimonies indicated that the testatrix was mentally and physically capable.
“The evidence on record satisfies our conscience that the Will was the result of a free and sound disposing mind,”
— Kerala High Court
Read Also:- Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC, Cites Violation of Public Trust
The Court also found no material to show that the propounder influenced the execution or that the Will was the product of coercion or manipulation.
Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the trial court’s judgment upholding the Will was affirmed.
Case Title: Dr. K.R. Leela Devi v. K.R. Rajaram and Ors.
Case No.: RFA No. 715 of 2013
Judgment Date: 29 May 2025
