Unsupported allegations of fabrication do not warrant revocation of an already-granted probate.

The Court had granted probate of a Will dated 23 December 2020, purportedly executed by Rubinder Kaur in favour of the petitioner, after considering the evidence of an attesting witness and finding the Will duly executed.

Rakesh Kumar applied to revoke the grant and stay the probate order, alleging that the 2020 Will was fabricated and that Kaur had instead executed a Will dated 22 November 2021 in his favour.

He also alleged that the beneficiary and executor were alienating estate properties.

Kumar had separately filed a probate petition concerning the 2021 Will before the District Judge, South District, Saket Courts.

Whether the applicant established grounds to revoke the probate granted in respect of the Will dated 23 December 2020.

Whether the probate order should be stayed pending the applicant’s challenge based on the Will dated 22 November 2021.

The Court referred to Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, requiring compliance with the statutory requirements for execution of a Will.

It also stated that probate establishes that a Will was properly executed and is the testator’s last Will; it does not itself confer title to the estate.

The Court identified no precedent or separate statutory test for revocation in its reasoning.

The applicant’s allegations that the 2020 Will was fabricated were unsupported by particulars or substantiating material, and he did not identify suspicious circumstances undermining the Court’s earlier finding that the Will had been properly executed.

The applicant’s claim under the 2021 Will remained to be determined in his separate probate proceeding; if that Will is proved to have been properly executed, the Court stated that it would prevail over the earlier Will.

The Court therefore declined to revoke the existing probate or restrain its operation, while clarifying that it expressed no view on the genuineness of the 2021 Will.

It left open the applicant’s ability to bring an appropriate suit to prevent sale of the estate properties and requested that the District Judge consider the 2021 Will uninfluenced by the rejection of these applications.

Both applications were disposed of.