Supreme Court on Probate, Suspicious Circumstances
By Legal Reporter New Delhi | March 2022
The law of wills in India often intersects with emotional family disputes, especially when certain heirs are excluded from inheritance. The Supreme Court of India addressed this sensitive issue in Swarnalatha and Others v. Kalavathy and Others (2022), delivering a crucial judgment that clarifies how courts should approach “suspicious circumstances” in testamentary matters.
This ruling is highly relevant for succession law, probate proceedings, and disputes involving unequal distribution of property among heirs. It reinforces the principle that testamentary freedom is paramount and cannot be overridden merely because a will appears unfair to some family members.
BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE
The case revolved around a family consisting of parents and their three children — two sons and one daughter. The mother executed an unregistered will in 1995, distributing her property to her sons while excluding her daughter. Later, the father executed a registered will in 1998, also favouring the sons and grandchildren, again excluding the daughter but providing reasons.
After the death of both parents, disputes arose regarding the validity of these wills. The daughter and one of the sons challenged the wills and sought partition of the property.
PROBATE PROCEEDINGS AND COURT DECISIONS
The District Court granted probate of both wills, finding that they were validly executed. However, the High Court reversed this decision, citing several alleged suspicious circumstances such as:
- Illness of the testatrix - Delay in filing probate proceedings - Contradictions in witness testimony - Exclusion of a natural heir
This led to an appeal before the Supreme Court.
CORE LEGAL ISSUES
The Supreme Court examined key legal questions:
- What constitutes “suspicious circumstances” in a will? - Can exclusion of a natural heir invalidate a will? - What is the scope of probate court jurisdiction? - Does Article 14 apply to testamentary disposition?
These issues are fundamental to the law of wills in India.
PROOF OF WILL UNDER SECTION 68
The Court reiterated that a will must be proved in accordance with Section 68 of the Evidence Act. This requires examination of at least one attesting witness who can confirm execution and attestation.
In this case, the requirements were satisfied, and there was no dispute regarding the signatures or mental capacity of the testators.
SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES – LEGAL TEST
The Supreme Court clarified that not every unusual feature of a will constitutes a suspicious circumstance. Courts must distinguish between genuine suspicion and mere conjecture.
The Court held that: - Delay in probate does not invalidate a will - Minor inconsistencies in testimony are not fatal - Illness does not imply lack of capacity unless proven
EXCLUSION OF NATURAL HEIRS
One of the most important aspects of this judgment is the treatment of exclusion of a natural heir. The Court held that a testator has complete freedom to distribute property as they wish.
The mere fact that a daughter was excluded does not make the will suspicious, especially when reasons are provided.
ARTICLE 14 – NOT APPLICABLE
The Court rejected the argument that exclusion of an heir violates Article 14 of the Constitution. It held that testamentary disposition is a matter of personal choice and cannot be subjected to equality principles.
This reinforces the autonomy of individuals in deciding how their property is distributed after death.
ROLE OF PROBATE COURT
The judgment also clarifies that probate courts are only concerned with: - Valid execution of the will - Testamentary capacity of the testator
They are not required to adjudicate title disputes or fairness among heirs.
CONCURRENT WILLS AND CORROBORATION
An important factor in this case was that the father’s will corroborated the mother’s will. He had attested her will and later reaffirmed its contents in his own will.
This strengthened the credibility of both documents and dispelled any doubts.
SUPREME COURT’S FINAL DECISION
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment and restored the probate granted by the District Court. It held that the wills were valid and free from suspicious circumstances.
IMPACT OF THE JUDGMENT
This ruling has significant implications: - It protects testamentary freedom - It limits judicial interference based on subjective suspicion - It clarifies the scope of probate proceedings - It ensures that valid wills are respected
PRACTICAL LESSONS
For individuals:
- Clearly state reasons for exclusion of heirs - Ensure proper execution and attestation
For lawyers:
- Focus on statutory compliance rather than emotional arguments - Address alleged suspicious circumstances with evidence
For litigants:
- Understand that fairness is not the test — legality is
CONCLUSION
The Swarnalatha case is a landmark judgment that reinforces the sanctity of wills and the autonomy of testators. It establishes that courts must rely on legal principles rather than emotional considerations when evaluating testamentary documents.
This decision strengthens the framework of succession law in India and ensures that valid wills are upheld, even in the face of family disputes. ALSO READ
Kavita Kanwar. Vs Pamela Mehta & Ors
Jagmail Singh & Anr Vs Karamjit Singh & Ors
Govindbhai Chhotabhai Patel & Ors Vs Patel Ramanbhai Mathurbhai
Jyoti Sharma v. Vishnu Goyal & Anr
Ramesh Chand (D) Thr. LRs. v. Suresh Chand & Anr
N.P. Saseendran v. N.P. Ponnamma & Ors
Bhagyalaxmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd Vs Babaldas Amtharam Patel (D) Through Legal Representatives & Others
Dr. Sushil Kumar Purbey & Anr Vs State Of Bihar And Ors