Case: Brij Mohan Lal Arora and Others Vs. Girdhari Lal Manocha

These appeals by special leave are directed against a judgment of the High Court of Allahabad. The dispute here centers round a Will dated September 18, 1969 executed by a widow, Smt. Chandi Rani, whereby she bequeathed all her movable and immovable property in favour of Girdhari Lal Manucha, respondent herein. Theis the grandson of the brother of the testatrix, while the appellants herein, who contest the factum and validity of the Will, are the sons of her husbands brother.2. Reversing the finding of the Civil Judge, Faizabad the High Court has held that the Will was duly executed by Smt. Chandi Rani and is valid.

Court's reasoning:
9. There is, however, evidence on the record, that despite her incapacity to write or sign, she was at the time of executing the Will on September 18, 1960 in sound mental condition, and capable of understanding what she was doing. This evidence is furnished by the statements of Girdhari Lal (Respondent), DW 3, Basdeo Singh, DW 1, an attesting witness of the Will, Ex.1, and Dr. Yog Dutt Kapoor, the family physician of the testatrix, who last attended on her on September 18, 1960. We have gone through their evidence with the assistance of Mr. Iyengar. In agreement with the High Court, we find their evidence trustworthy. Dr. Kapoor testified that when he examined Chandi Rani at about 11.00 a.m. or noon on September 18, her mental condition was all right, though her condition of heart was weak. At aboutp.m. on the same day, Dr. Kapoor again examined her and found that her condition was bad and serious.10. These witnesses do not speak about the precise time of the execution of the Will, because no pointed question in regard thereto was put to them, even inBut the attesting witness, DW 1 does say that when he went to her in the morning, she told the witness that she was all right and wanted to execute a Will in favour of Girdhari Lal. DW 1 further testified that Chandi Rani affixed herbut did not put her signaturebecause her hand was shaking and she could not sign.11. Thus, it was very clearly established that at the time of executing the Will, Ex.1, in the morning of September 18, 1960, the testatrix was of sound disposing mind, but was physically incapable of signing her name. These twin facts, which stood firmly established, had completely dispelled circumstance (2). Circumstance (5), though insignificant, also stood greatly obliterated by the evidence of the attesting witness who in general way put the time of the execution of the Will in the morning of September 18. Circumstances 3 and 4 have been stated only to be rejected.