 Bills are an important role not only for the purposes of an advocate or on the judicial aspects, but it touches every person in one way or the other. But, simply is it a writing a will? Does it end there or there are certain suspicious circumstances or what is the legal journey in these aspects? Does there lie any role of an advocate or a witness? To come to the conclusion, the sanctity of a will and who are the actual beneficiaries of the will and what are the modes of fulfilling the will? These issues normally crop up in the mind of a person especially who is in and around connected with the will. In a lighter way, they say that where there is will, you have relatives and friends. And that is why will not only when we commonly say that where there is a will, there is a way. Therefore, to understand this particular aspect regarding the proof of will and what is the position vis-a-vis the advocate and witnesses. When we understand the aspect of proving of will, this particular role aspects would be dealt with as Sushila, a senior advocate, High Court of Karnataka, who has been very closely and passionately helping us in our legal journey of knowledge empowerment and legal sharing. We have done various sessions with her. We have also started a new series on role of dynamics of relationships. First part we have already uploaded. Second part would be uploaded in the coming week. So one can also be connected in respect of that series of dynamics of relationship. Those who have been connected on the LinkedIn would have seen that ma'am Sushila is taking different aspects of mediation and life as such. They can connect with that, few dotted lines by her actually gives the meaning of life in the right manner. And we are all thankful that you have connected with us on a weekend. I will not take much time. I will ask ma'am to take over the back. What do you ma'am? Thank you Mr. Vikas. Greetings to one and all. I am really happy to be associated with this Beyond Love CLC. Each one of you in the team of Mr. Vikas, you are doing human service to the society. And we are all thankful to you being members of the fraternity that I have been watching several videos. You have really been imparting knowledge and sitting anywhere in the nook and corner of this country. We are able to catch and learn many aspects which we couldn't have done otherwise. I am extremely thankful to you. I wish you all the best in your endeavors. And coming to today's topic, we have chosen the topic proof of wills, role of advocates and the witnesses. One thing that I would like to say here is that I have structured this session keeping in view of the difficulties faced by the advocates and what is required to be done by the advocates and what is required to be done by the witnesses. What is expected from the witnesses? I am focusing on these two aspects mainly in this entire session. One thing is that people approaches, we are lawyers, people approaches. First category is they may request our help in assisting them in drafting the will. That's one thing. Second is they may take our help in seeing to it that the will is revoked. Second chance. Third chance, all these things come within the category of drafting. Third is they may request our help in seeing to that that the will that is already been executed by them is modified altered and they may request us to help them drafting with the court decisions. This is one part of it. Second is that a person may come to us and say look I have a will in my favor. Please get me a declaration from the court of law on the basis of the will. A has filed a suit for partition but there is already a will in my favor. So as far as this portion of the property which is covered under the will is concerned, please help me prove before the court that I am beneficiary under the will. So they want your help, our help rather, Advocate's help to see to it that the will which is executed in the favor is proved in accordance with law. This is second category of persons. The third category of persons may approach us and say look A is dependent on a will and he is seeking for declaration. I know for sure that this will is not a genuine will. Please help me in disproving the will and say to it that the will is not proved by the other side. This is the third category. So keeping these three positions which we as Advocates may have to consider in our role as Advocates. I am just requesting all of you to consider whatever I am suggesting here in a broader perspective. Some sections have to be very neatly dealt with by the Advocates and these sections have to be brought to the attention of the court repeatedly though they are very simple. First is Indian Succession Act. One is Indian Succession Act, another one is Evidence Act. You must have complete idea about these two statutes. Section 2H of the Indian Succession Act deals with the definition of the will. My request to all your counsels is that Section 2H says a will is a legal declaration. Please understand the word is legal declaration. This you may have to keep in mind because when I will be taking you through some of the decisions this phrase may be of greater importance. Legal declaration of the intention of the testator. So another aspect that you need to consider here is one is legal declaration. Another is intention of the testator with regard to his property. His property is the third element which he desires to be carried into effect after his death. So three elements legal declaration, intention, his property after his death. These are the elements which we need to consider. Will is often considered as the voice of the dead person which we listen to after his death. Look at this how nicely it is said. Now you have to also consider Section 59 of the Indian Succession Act. Person capable of making wills. Who is a person capable of making wills? Every person of sound mind not being a minor is what Section 59 says. Why I am requesting you to repeatedly look into Section 59 of the Indian Succession Act is that more focus is given by attempts with the advocates and attempts even the parties who are relying upon will or who do not want the will to be proved is on the physical status of the party who has executed the will as on the date of execution of the will. Please see Section 59 never never refers to physical status of the person. It only refers to every person of a sound mind. This is where your evidence has to be very clear. Advocates have to take a lot of caution in preparing the effort of examination and chief. What was the health condition of the person who had executed the will as on the date of execution of the will? If he was unwell you please state that yes he was unwell but not withstanding that person being unwell he was of sound mind. It is here the doctor's evidence may also be very relevant. If a person was ailing he was unwell for a long time. On the given date of execution of the will how his mental status was. To this extent the person who was attending to the deceased person as his doctor his evidence may also be relevant. This one aspect may have to be considered by the advocates when we are assisting the parties in the proof of a will. Or if you want to disprove the will then you have to get some doctors who would give evidence to the effect that because of ABCD diseases a person will not be having sound mind. He will not be able to give his instructions to the other party in order to see to it that the will is drafted as per his instructions. This is where you have to focus on section 59. I suggest that please see to it that the sound mind refers to the capacity of the person who has executed the will. So focus on this aspect of section 59. Many a times it so happens that people come to us and say madam the will is registered. Even in appellate courts we see in high court we see in some of the cases that come up before the Supreme Court also people say that our will is a registered will. Please see that just because a will is registered it does not dispense with the proof of the will. Part 3 SCC 209 Part 3 SCC 209 Murthy v. Sardambal This case gives you a clear idea that notwithstanding the fact that the will is registered you have to go through the formalities which are required to be followed in order to prove the will according to the statute. Now another decision which may also be important wherein the will is not registered. AR 54 SC 280 AR 54 SC 280 AR 54 SC 280 AR 54 SC 280 versus Kantha Devi versus Kantha Devi. In this case court has held that registration of a will is not mandatory. So just because the will is not registered we advocates need not have any apprehensions number one but just because it is registered we can't give away and tell the party you need not have to prove anything because the will is already registered. These two aspects may have to be considered. Now the next aspect that we have to consider here is execution. Will is a document it's a legal declaration it has to be executed all of you will be knowing that there is difference between signing a document and executing a document. Mere subscription of my signature is not sufficient. I should have executed the document. What is execution? With regard to this I request all of you particularly the younger generation to read this judgment of Panakonta Satyanarayanan and others Panakonta Satyanarayanan and others 2005 part 8 SCC 67 What does this citation say? I repeat the citation 2005 8 SCC 67 Exeguation consists in signing a document of course but it should have been written out as per the supposing I am the person who has executed the will it should have been written out as per my instructions and it should have been read over to me written out, read over and I should have gone through that understood and gone through that I should have understood oh yes this is what I said and this is what is written and this is what is written to me and this is how it is made understandable to me. These are the aspects these are the formerities in order to see to it that the will is a legal declaration of the deceased person that's where if you want to why importance so much of importance is given to execution is the definition under section 2H 2H starts with legal declaration of the intention of the testator so you have to read the section 2H in conjunction with what the court has said as to what exactly is meant by execution of the will that's where I am requesting your answers to see. Now see when the question of proof of the will comes two things are very important suspicious circumstances all suspicious circumstances will have to be removed if any person comes to you and says look I want this will to be proved you please question yourself question the other party what would be the doubt that may arise in the mind of the court or what would be the circumstance I mean circumstance which may be projected as a suspicious circumstance note down ABCDEF see how would you explain that's where a person who is dependent on the will has to prove the valid exhibition of the will by removing all possibilities of any of the suspicious circumstances that may cloud the will this is one aspect the second aspect is the authenticity of the will the authenticity of the will always depends upon two factors number one is the circumstances surrounding the execution of the will if a person says it is not a genuine will then it is the duty of the person who is dependent on the will to prove that the authenticity of the will is proved so authenticity of the will always depends on two factors number one is the circumstances surrounding the execution of the will number two quality of the evidence that you give to prove its geninous I repeat one is circumstances surrounding the execution of the will the second is quality of the evidence that you give in order to prove the geninous of the will this is second thing what proof should a propounder of the will give there is a will in my favor what do I what am I required to do before the court number one I have to bring it to the notice of the court and prove it in accordance with law that the will is indeed signed by the or the LTM of the testator the testator is put on the will will is indeed signed by the testator number one the testator was at the time of the execution of the will was in sound state of mind these factors should come in your examination chief appointment in the examination chief appointment of the witnesses also they should come or if you are not there somebody else who could speak on these aspects will have to be there for example second aspect testator was at the time in a sound and disposing state of mind that means supposing my grandfather had executed a will while I was in America I was not here I don't know anything about it I have not been here for the past 15 years but my grandfather siblings will be there somebody else will be there who will be able to come and tell look this was the status of his mind and he was quite healthy as far as his soundness of mind is concerned this is the second aspect which you need to prove he understood the nature and effect of dispositions many times people will say my grandmother was taken as though she was she had to sign on some papers for the purpose of getting old age pension or to get an other card in her favor or to get a bank loan but this will did is got executed from her this is no execution this is mere subscription of signature so the third element that you need to prove is that he understood the person who has executed the will has understood the nature and effect of his dispositions that also has to be understood and the next aspect is this signature out of his free will there was no coercion or compulsion or undue influence these facts will have to be established by the proponder of the will and of course all the suspicious circumstances will have to be removed and this should be to the satisfaction of the conscience of the court this is another aspect which we need to understand however we need not have to worry too much about the suspicious circumstances because the court has repeatedly held each and every circumstance cannot be considered as a suspicious circumstance but by and large any doubt as to the signature of the particular person that is the testator with regard to this there should not be any suspicion if there is any suspicion it has to be removed one is that unnatural or improbable or not normal this should not be there recently I had a case where a person had come to me telling that the sister had executed will in favour of another sister though sister herself had 7 children who were all very poor why would she execute a will in favour of her other sister is a big question so if this were to be considered as a suspicious circumstance the supporting evidence has to be given in such a way that this suspicion is removed this is one aspect now you see section 63 is very important as per us the question of proof of will is considered the section 63 says 63 A says the testator shall affix his thumb mark or he has to put his signature fine B says signature shall be so placed that it was intended thereby to give effect to the will we have seen in some cases in olden days what they used to do is they used to sign several papers and give it to a person who would take the papers always to the lawyer's office and the contents will be written in between or some blank papers for various reasons the person might have given and they would fill in the blanks the portion of the paper which is blank will be used in order to see to it that something is written there which would speak as though it is the intention of the person that is the testator but the positioning takes very important place here because section 63 B will have to be read I remember a case where a person it is a holographic will written by hand by a person he executed a will in favour of his first wife whom he had divorced he had executed a need will take this example where he had executed a clean will and beneath he had put his name in capital letters so as per us geninus of the will is concerned it is completely nobody could question it because he was a very highly qualified person the will is a genuine will but is it a valid will in order to be a valid will there has to be his signature the only contention taken by the other side was yes he had written a will everything fine he had written in his own handwriting there were two persons but he had put his name in capital letters he was supposed to put his signature which he did not put that is why it is not a valid way look at this so I do not know whether such contention will be appreciated by the court or will not be appreciated by the court I am telling you that 63 refers to a situation where signature shall be so placed that it was intended thereby to give effect to the will this aspect has to be concerned otherwise what happens is a will goes in double line spacing throat as it comes down you know suddenly it will be in half line spacing or one line spacing and it looks as though the spacing is arranged as though to make use of a paper where the tested signature was already available these are all the suspicious circumstances where you have to be very careful about section 63c is very important section 63c says will shall be attested by at least two or more witnesses so minimum is two witnesses there are some genine cases where only one witness signature is there there is nothing doing you cannot rely upon that at all there can be more than two witnesses but there has to be a minimum of two witnesses to a will if it is less than one that will cannot be looked into at all notwithstanding there being more number of witnesses at least one of the witnesses will have to be examined this is a mandatory requirement this cannot be dispensed with please mark it down one more thing that we need to understand is both the witnesses need not be present at the same time generally while cross examining we do this and the person who wants to see to it that will is not proved they also cross examine so much were you also there were you also there need not be all that I have to see to it supposing I am a witness I have to say to it that this will was drafted by a and sorry this will was executed by a in favor of his grandson and I have I saw her putting this signature and this is my signature I have witnessed this document there is yet another thing that you have to consider supposing while I put the signature I get the will drafted as per my instructions my the witness to the document need not be there I can simply take this document go to the witness and tell look I have executed this will in favor of my driver son you please attest this document on the basis of my statement also the witness can affix his signature because he is confident that she has executed a will in favor of ABC whatever it may be this is another aspect this you have to be very careful about section 74 of the Indian Succession Act refers to wordings that are used in the will while drafting we have to be very careful or while preparing the affidavit of examination chief of the witnesses or the person in whose favor the will is executed we have to be very careful about this provision section 74 says it refers to wordings of the will by and large why do we depend on the words that are used in the will to understand the intentions of the person who has executed the will there is no particular format is required anything can be explained and mentioned in any language but the wordings used should imply the intentions of the testator that is what is required to be done section 76 says this number or misdescription of object is immaterial for example I have at only one house it is my only property that I have but while mentioning the Indie schedule instead of mentioning that that property is in locality B I mention it as though the property is in locality C this misdescription will not invalidate the will please understand that court will have to go travel a long way to see to it that testated succession is respected generally what happens is the moment we place the will we start oh will may not be believed by the court no that is the provision we have the statute has given us the liberty that is the way in which I will prevent my property which would otherwise go by inheritance or succession to my own kitten I want to prevent that that's the right I have that's where I do not want to depend upon interstate succession I want to depend upon testate succession if minor discrepancies are there we need not have to worry supposing whether we can supply the words please see section 77 of the Indian succession act where words are incomplete it may be supplied by the context that is where if you read the will 10 times or 15 times you feel that it's not giving the complete picture may be this may be considered as a suspicious circumstance then take recourse to section 77 the current if the context can supply the words that's where your skill as an advocate will depend this is another aspect section 80 is also very important the extrinsic evidence is inadmissible if there is patent ambiguity I was just looking at a situation we had a case where two sisters had filed a partition suit against the third sister it was their mother's property so mother had died father was also not there ideally speaking all the three daughters should get equal share ideally speaking all the three daughters should get equal share the third sister in whose favor different in whose favor there was a will executed by the mother she said these two sisters are not at all my sisters these two persons plaintiffs are not at all my sisters I don't know who the plaintiffs are I am the only daughter to deceased testator she has executed a will in my favor it's a registered will what was the recital in the will I am so and so I am executing this will in favor of my only daughter that is a dependent is what is there the only question that we raised before the court was that if she was the only daughter where was it necessary to execute the will it would by default have gone to her that is where the whole thing turned the court would consider that such circumstances as a suspicious circumstance if I want to be the only daughter there was no requirement for my mother to execute the will in my favor because by any stretch of imagination it would go only to me not to anybody else so the question of writing there as only daughter these are the things that you have to consider very carefully now you see section 82 in fact in many of the judgments the supreme court has very well considered this import of section 82 very well meaning has to be considered from the entire will you can take one line and attribute meaning to it entire will has to be holistically looked into and a comprehensive reading of the will is what is required to be done a clause has got two meanings and one has some effect which would give effect to the state succession and one would give effect to interstate succession the will has to be interpreted in such a way that it should go in favor of the state succession that is where I request whenever a case comes wherever the issue of will is there this part 6 of the Indian succession act has to be completely read threadbare by the advocates and majority of the decisions supreme court decisions larger than decisions are there you have to go through these things this is one thing and section 89 refers to a situation where will is void for uncertainty if the will has to be rejected on the ground of uncertainty then you have to bring it within the purview of section 89 now as far as witnesses role of witnesses is concerned keeping all these provisions in the statute under the Indian succession act is concerned I request you to see what is the role of the attesting witness many a times people come to us and say look I could have examined the witnesses but both the witnesses were dead or the witnesses were not available one of the witnesses has become very old one of the witnesses has become very I mean sick he is not available he is not in India at all what do I do that is why I did not examine any witness none of these things will be accepted by the court that is where you have to follow section 68 of the evidence act and section 69 of the evidence act if the witnesses are not available supposing today you come and get a will executed and then I am one of the attesting witnesses I am already 62 year old supposing that will comes question before any court on that day I will not be alive then what do you do how do you prove that we say to it that my children are summoned to the court to say that this is my mother's signature yes she was a attesting witness I can identify my mother's signature number one my children are also not available what do you do get some of my juniors who have acquaintance with me my signature one of my juniors will come and depose before the court I have been practicing with madam for 20 years 30 years I can identify this signature somehow you have to get otherwise get some documents which I in my personal capacity would have executed in favor of somebody else I would have executed a sale date I would have executed a lease date or I would have a loan from a bank whatever it is get my admitted signature from somewhere and then see to it that the signature of Susheela on the witness is compared and then the court will agree that this witness attesting witness being not available as on this day under section 69 I can consider this proof to the effect that this deed was attested by madam Susheela that's how you have to go as far as this section 69 is concerned I request all of you to read one of the most wonderful judgments V. Kalyana Swami V. Kalyana Swami versus Bhakta Varsalam this is a beautiful judgment 2020 SCC online page 584 V. Kalyana Swami versus Bhakta Varsalam 2020 SCC online SC584 may be para 74 will be very relevant see the initial burden is on the person who is dependent on the will the proponent of the will has to prove that it's a genuine will section 2H it's a legal declaration all these things have to be considered supposing the other party says the will is not a genuine will it is a result of coercion undue influence or fraud or misrepresentation then the person who alleges it has to prove it please be very careful I suggest that we file a suit for partition supposing the different come and say that there is a will in my favor one of the different will say there is a will in our favor plaintiff should not be getting anything then immediately I request you to file rejoinder or replication in most of the cases I see that the moment the other side brings a will into picture you don't file a counter at all please say that this will is not a genuine will or he had no right or authority to execute the will because it is not his property whatever be your contention but if you mention that it is a result of coercion you have to take a specific plea if it is because of undue influence undue influence if it is a fraud if it is because of impersonation impersonation what it is you can't just take all these phrases undue influence coercion by compulsion by force all these things you can what you want to take mention that because ultimately the burden will be on you to prove these aspects that's another aspect that we have to request you to consider and I request all of you to read the judgment the circumstances under which a will is executed will always be looked into by the court in this context one of the beautiful judgments by 4 judges is A.I.R.1963 A.I.R.1963 Supreme Court 1703 Pyarelal v. Rameshwar the surrounding circumstances I had taken you through two aspects as far as the proof of the will is concerned one is that the surrounding circumstances and another one is the authenticity of the will so circumstances surrounding its execution will always be considered by the court A.I.R.1963 Supreme Court it is a judgment by 4 judges please go through this judgment now whether a co-personary property can be big question this question came into consideration and now it is no more rest integral Pavitri Devi versus Darbari Singh Pavitri Devi versus Darbari Singh 1994 1994 SCC 392 even a co-personary property can be big question that is no more rest integral now you see if a person comes to you and says I want to execute a will or my grandmother wants to execute a will you please come home help us in drafting the bill please see whether she was always putting her signature or she was always putting thumb mark if a person who had always been subscribing his signature also put his LTM because of ABC reasons which he cannot he cannot put his signatures some people will have Parkinson's disease or there will be some shivers they can't hold the pen they can't write for various reasons please bring it within the purview of the recitals also so that this aspect tomorrow should not be taken against the testator this is another aspect I request you to consider see the geniiness of the will is different from validity of the will the will may be a genuine document but did I have the authority to execute the will be quite a given property in favor of my grandson is the question there are some cases where a husband executes a will in respect of his properties and also in respect of the property standing to the credit of his wife it may be a genuine will but did he have a right to execute a will in respect of the property which absolutely belong to his wife the answer is no so it is not a valid will it may be a genuine will this difference will also be there please consider that see where there are two repugnant provisions in successive interest what has to be done see the court will have to interpret in such a way that the repugnancy is removed and the effect of the will has to be given that is where one judgment 1964 part 2 1964 part 2 SCM 722 Ramachandra Shanai Ramachandra Shanai's case a very beautiful expression is used in this judgment court will proceed to the farthest extent to avoid repugnancy I had a peculiar case where the father had said the property should go to son and son should see to it that the daughter should be given in marriage to a respectable person and he should give X amount of money every year to the daughter that means brother has to do all these things the responsibility was put on him unfortunate situation was that the daughter went away with somebody even before she was 18 year old and another unfortunate situation was that from 18th year till she became 45 year old she never was in touch with the brother so this part of the will could not be complied with at all so will with the condition what would happen whether because of this the court would throw away the will or court would consider the will how it would be interpreted these are all factors that's where a person who is dependent on such bills should see to it that the clouding circumstances which may arise due to repugnancy if any in any of the situations will have to be removed one thing that I request all of you to consider here is this Bajran factory limited case this is a very beautiful case please read this judgment Bajran factory limited and another versus University of Calcutta which clearly says 2007 part 7 SCC 183 will must be read as a whole and particular part thereof cannot be looked into by the court this is the sanctity that is attached to a person who wants to deviate himself from interstate succession that is the crux of the matter here see one of the judgments which will give you complete idea as to how to prove the will you will find in Shivkumar and others versus Sharuna Basappa in 2021 part 11 SCC 277 a very beautiful judgment which indirectly takes you and directly takes you through section 74 to 111 of the succession act and in this judgment you will get answers to several questions related to will see in some cases the question will arise what if restricted right is given to somebody and absolute right is given to somebody else should we throw off that will should we not be supposing a man would say this property as long as my wife is alive shall be enjoyed by her and after her death it shall go to my daughter but not to my son I suggest that whenever such wills are there why the other children are excluded will have to be mentioned in the recital of the will if people approach you for drafting of the will specifically brought in the recital of the will because you are an advocate and somebody comes to you and gives you the will you will have to ask how many other children the father had he had four other children but he executed will only in my favor equating the entire property in my favor please explain the surrounding circumstances supporting the execution of the will which prevented that testator from not giving anything to the other persons this is what has to be looked into the another judgment which would help you in understanding the entire gamet of this proof of the will is Venkatachala Iyengar H. Venkatachala Iyengar versus Timma Jamma Venkatachala Iyengar versus Timma Jamma AIR 59 SC 3 judges ben judgment beautiful judgment it clearly says the proponder of the will will have to place satisfactory evidence to remove the suspicions if any from the mind of the court and what are the ingredients of attestation for that you have to go back to Perakantala Sapnaina's case which I had referred to you earlier this Shukumar's case I had referred to you earlier what if one of the witnesses is not available in the absence of the witnesses how do you do about it for that you have to fall back on Shukumar's case Shukumar versus Shana Vasappa I repeat this wonderful judgment 2021 11 SCC 277 please read that I was referring to a situation where I was telling you that the testator need not sign the will in the presence of the attesting witness supposing attesting witnesses you need not have to worry take records to 63C and there is one judgment of the supreme court Ganeshan versus Kalanjiam Ganeshan's case 2020 11 SCC 715 this judgment gives answer wherever the testator had already signed and that was not seen by the person that is the attesting witness and he had subsequently put his sign based on the statements made by the testator that's where you have to look at this judgment V. Prabhakara versus Basavaraj is a very wonderful case which says that section 68 is to be mandatorily followed in view of section 63C V. Prabhakara versus Basavaraj 2022 11 SCC 115 please read this judgment again Shukumar's case Shukumar versus Shana Basappa's case says the person who alleges fraud has to prove that the will is not a G9 document but just because he has not proved that the will is not a G9 document your responsibility will not go away you have to prove the will in accordance with law section 63C has to be born in mind section 68 if section 68 cannot be complied with section 69 later the other person who disputes the will will have to discharge the burden and show that these circumstances then he has to prove here the shifting of the willness is what is considered in this case now unjust exclusion of dependents gives rise to suspicion supposing A has got 4 children who are all very ordinary and very poor are not very well notwithstanding this fact A executes and bequests a will in favour of her driver or her servant or her neighbour or somebody else some outsider then generally there will be this will be considered as a suspicious circumstance regarding this I request you to kindly read Kavitha Kanwar versus Prameela Mehta 2021 Part 11 In Shukumar's case that I was referring to Shukumar versus Charna was a false case court has considered some of the circumstances as in that particular case the shaky or doubtful signature it is not like my signatures which is found generally anywhere else shaky or doubtful signature feeble or uncertainty uncertain mind of the test data unfair disposition of property unjust exclusion of legal hairs particularly dependents I don't leave anything for my wife I give it away to somebody else unjust exclusion you and leading part this is very important in making of the will by the beneficiary under the will these are considered as some of the suspicious circumstances nevertheless I would like to say one thing here generally wherever the beneficiary of the will takes active participation in the execution of the will it is considered as a suspicious circumstance but nevertheless you can always explain this suspicious circumstance supposing the signatures are on some sheets only and not on all sheets this is also considered as may be a circumstance where which will be considered as a suspicious circumstance use of different pens three of the pages I signed in one pen and the rest of the pages I signed with another pen this has to be explained if this is done please explain the situation is what I am requesting and as far as evidence of the doctor is concerned this case may kindly be concerned Murthy and others versus Shardambal 2022 3 SCC 209 where the person who executes the will dies immediately thereafter within few days or few months or whatever it may be and had some ailments better you get the doctor's evidence done all said and done we Prabhakara versus Basavaraj case clearly says that a testamentary court is not a court of suspicion please see a testamentary court is not a court of suspicion that's where you should impress upon the court it cannot act as a court of suspicion but that of conscience that is where any proof should be the satisfaction of the judicial conscience in this context we look at armchair theory with regard to armchair theory it is as though the dead person cannot come and speak so what would the court do court would sit in the armchair of the testator and consider the whole circumstances and if the court comes to a conclusion yes if actually it takes gets into a trance where it is empathy taking an imaginary leap into the position of that testator the court takes an imaginary leap into the position of the testator and thinks whether that person could have definitely executed this will or not that's where this armchair's theory is considered as very important in the case of any proof appreciation of any proof with regard to will for this I request all of you to read year 1953 supreme court 304 Narendra this is Lakshmana Nadar Lakshman Nadar's case another case is Narendra Gopal Vidyarthi versus Rajat Vidya 2009 3 SCC 287 you have to be concerned one aspect which I was referring to you is this if a beneficiary takes active participation you have to explain the situation wherein there was a compelling circumstance on the part of the beneficiary to assist the person to execute the will that is one aspect and second aspect is if the attesting witness himself is also a beneficiary that also has to be brought into the notice of the court in an effective manner so I think with all these things I would like to the presentation if you have any questions you can contact me Mr. Vikas will have my number and you can contact me I will be more than happy to assist you with citations I am writing a book on the proof of will so probably if you explain the context and the point on which you require any judgment or any help you can please approach me within the time permissible time I would like to get back to you people my mail ID will be available with Mr. Vikas G and my phone number will also be Mr. Vikas G and I thank one and all for your patient hearing thank you all thank you ma'am I think there couldn't be a more crispier concise session on this it not only would help the lawyers to understand but it will also help to plug in for even a common man when he is drafting a will maybe personally or through a lawyer that all things are done in a right manner and we have posted some of the citations which you have done on the youtube channel it will also like to post it on our website shortly and thank you everyone for joining us and encouraging us for taking the sessions forward and that is one of the reasons that people like S. Sushila a senior advocate from Panathika Aikut also despite what we should do except because they all and I feel that once you believe in something you start connecting with the people we are all dots and we come to become a line of action only once God helps us to connect with that thank you everyone stay safe stay blessed