Patna HC Denies Non-Parties Leave To Contest Probate Appeal Over Will Executed Two Days Before Testator’s Death

The appeal arose from probate proceedings in Test Case No. 15 of 2018, in which probate was granted on the basis of a Will executed on 23 February 2018; the testator died two days later, on 25 February 2018.

The proposed intervenors sought leave to contest the Letters Patent Appeal, stating that they had not been parties to the probate proceedings and that the Will’s execution shortly before the testator’s death, together with the fact that an attesting witness was the son of a beneficiary, raised matters they should be permitted to bring before the Court.

The respondents relied on witness evidence supporting execution and attestation of the Will.

Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, requires a Will to be executed by the testator and attested by two or more witnesses; Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provides for proof of an attested document through examination of at least one attesting witness, as recounted in the respondents’ submissions.

The Court applied the probate-jurisdiction principle stated in Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka v. Jasjit Singh, (1993) 2 SCC 507, that a probate court determines due execution and attestation and whether the testator had a sound disposing mind; it does not determine the validity of particular bequests or title to property. A probate grant is a judgment in rem and remains conclusive unless revoked in accordance with law.

The Court treated the probate inquiry as confined to the Will’s genuineness, due execution and the testator’s sound disposing state of mind, rather than the merits of any bequest or property-title question.

It noted that the original Will was in the Court’s custody and that the evidence of A.W.-1 to A.W.-4 established its execution and attestation.

Against that record, it concluded that the applicants’ concerns—including the timing of execution and the relationship between an attesting witness and a beneficiary—did not establish an infirmity in the probate findings or another legally sustainable basis for intervention.

Because leave was refused, the Letters Patent Appeal could not proceed and was also dismissed; any pending applications were disposed of.