Signature, Thumb Impression or Registration Not Enough to Prove a Will: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reiterated that merely producing a Will bearing the testator’s signature or thumb impression, or showing that the document was registered, is not sufficient to establish its legal validity. The person relying upon the Will must prove that it was executed and attested in the manner required by law.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh emphasised that an unprivileged Will must satisfy the mandatory requirements under Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act. The provision requires attestation by at least two witnesses, who must have seen the testator sign or affix a mark, or must have received the testator’s personal acknowledgment of the signature or mark.
The Court made clear that proving the testator’s signature or thumb impression is only one part of the exercise. The propounder of the Will must additionally establish the required attestation and due execution through legally admissible evidence.
The judgment also highlighted the significance of Section 68 of the Evidence Act. Ordinarily, at least one attesting witness must be examined to prove execution when such a witness is alive, available and capable of giving evidence. A witness merely describing what happened at the time of execution cannot replace the statutory role of an attesting witness.
The Supreme Court further rejected the argument that registration gives a Will automatic evidentiary validity. Unlike certain other registered documents, a registered Will continues to require proof through an attesting witness. Registration may be a supporting circumstance, but it does not eliminate the statutory requirements governing testamentary documents.
The Court also dealt with the exceptional mechanism under Section 69 of the Evidence Act. This provision cannot be invoked simply as an alternative chosen by the party seeking to prove the Will. It becomes relevant when the normal method of examining an attesting witness has become impossible, subject to the statutory conditions.
The ruling is significant for inheritance and property disputes because registered Wills are often presented as though registration itself settles questions of authenticity. The Supreme Court has reinforced that courts must examine whether the Will was actually executed in accordance with law and whether its attestation has been properly established.
The Court’s approach also preserves an important distinction between registration of a document and proof of testamentary execution. A Will may be registered, yet its legal effect can still fail to be established if the mandatory requirements relating to execution and attestation are not proved.
In practical terms, the judgment means that a claimant cannot succeed merely by producing a registered Will carrying the deceased person’s signature or thumb impression. The person relying upon it carries the primary burden of demonstrating that the document represents a legally valid and duly executed testament.
