The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that if a Will excludes a natural heir without offering any reason, it raises a suspicious circumstance which demands close scrutiny. Although such exclusion alone does not render the Will invalid, it casts doubt on whether it was executed voluntarily and genuinely.
“Deprivation of a natural heir, by itself, may not amount to a suspicious circumstance because the whole idea behind the execution of the Will is to interfere with the normal line of succession,” the Court observed.
Read also: Kapil Sibal Urges Supreme Court to Stop 'Udaipur Files', Calls It Vilification of Entire Community
A Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Joymalya Bagchi delivered the judgment in Gurdial Singh v. Jagir Kaur. The case involved the validity of a Will executed by Maya Singh, who had left out his wife Jagir Kaur entirely and had not even acknowledged her status as his wife in the Will.
The appellant, Maya Singh’s nephew, claimed ownership of the property on the basis of the Will. He also denied the marital relationship between Maya Singh and Jagir Kaur. However, there was no mention of Jagir Kaur or any explanation for her exclusion, despite the fact that she lived with Maya Singh till his last days and was nominated to receive his pension—establishing that he regarded her as his lawful wife.
“Such erasure of marital status is the telltale insignia of the propounder and not the testator himself,” the Court remarked.
Read also: High Court: Jail Imprisonment Can’t Be Ground to Reject Appeal Against Property Freezing Under
The Trial Court upheld the Will as valid, but the High Court reversed this, and the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision. The Apex Court cited previous rulings, including Ram Piari vs. Bhagwant & Ors (1993) 3 SCC 364, stating that the absence of any justification for excluding a natural heir casts a shadow over the Will.
“Prudence requires reason for denying the benefit of inheritance to natural heirs and an absence of it... shrouds the disposition with suspicion,” the Court stated.
Furthermore, the Court clarified that registration of a Will alone cannot be taken as proof of its genuineness. It stressed that all surrounding circumstances, including omission of vital facts like the existence of the testator’s wife, must be considered together.
Read also: Isha Foundation Moves Supreme Court to Restrain Nakkheeran from Publishing Alleged Defamatory Content
“Suspicious circumstance i.e. non-mention of the status of wife or the reason for her disinheritance in the Will ought not to be examined in isolation,” the judgment emphasized.
The Court also dismissed the argument made by the Trial Court that Jagir Kaur's absence from her husband’s funeral indicated a strained relationship. It observed that in Sikh customs, male relatives usually perform last rites, and her absence was not significant.
Case : Gurdial Singh v Jagir Kaur
Appearances -
For appellant - Mr. Manoj Swarup, Sr. Adv. Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR; Ms. Ananya Basudha, Adv.
For respondents: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Vishal Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Bhaskar Y. Kulkarni, AOR Ms. Divya Kumari Sharma, Adv.