"A will is regestered with the registration department of Kerala Government. Do you think an invalid will can be registered. Once the will is registered, and the person who created the will passed away, I am entitled to get that property. I have the right on my property and I can do whatever I like to."
The Supreme Court in a recent Judgment (https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2009/17698/17698_2009_16_1501_47437_Judgement_06-Oct-2023.pdf) has held that a Will Can't Be Presumed To Be Valid Merely Because It Is Registered. The ratio laid down by the Apex Court repays study -
21. It is well settled that mere registration would not sanctify a document by attaching to it an irrebuttable presumption of genuineness. The observations of this Court in Rani Purnima Debi and another vs. Kumar Khagendra Narayan Deb and another , which were referred to by the Himachal Pradesh High Court, are of guidance in this regard and are worthy of extraction. These observations read as under:
“There is no doubt that if a Will has been registered, that is a circumstance which may, having regard to the circumstances, prove its genuineness. But the mere fact that a Will is registered will not by itself be sufficient to dispel all suspicion regarding it where suspicion exists, without submitting the evidence of registration to a close examination. If the evidence as to registration on a close examination reveals that the registration was made in such a manner that it was brought home to the testator that the document of which he was admitting execution was a Will disposing of his property and thereafter he admitted its execution and signed it in token thereof, the registration will dispel the doubt as to the genuineness of the Will. But if the evidence as to registration shows that it was done in a perfunctory manner, that the officer registering the Will did not read it over to the testator or did not bring home to him that he was admitting the execution of a Will or did not satisfy himself in some other way (as, for example, by seeing the testator reading the Will) that the testator knew that it was a Will the execution of which he was admitting, the fact that the Will was registered would not be of much value. It is not unknown that registration may take place without the executant really knowing what he was registering. Law reports are full of cases in which registered Wills have not been acted upon ……… Therefore, the mere fact of registration may not by itself be enough to dispel all suspicion that may attach to the execution and attestation of a Will; though the fact that there has been registration would be an important circumstance in favour of the Will being genuine if the evidence as to registration establishes that the testator admitted the execution of the Will after knowing that it was a Will the execution of which he was admitting.”
22. We may also refer to Janki Narayan Bhoir vs. Narayan Namdeo Kadam , wherein this Court held that, to prove that a Will has been executed, the requirements in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Section 63 of the Succession Act have to be complied with. It was pointed out that the most important point is that the Will has to be attested by two or more witnesses and each of these witnesses must have seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the Will or must have seen some other person sign the Will in the presence of and by the direction of the testator or must have received from the testator a personal acknowledgment of his signature or mark or of the signature or mark of such other person and each of the witnesses has to sign the Will in the presence of the testator. It was further held that, a person propounding a Will has got to prove that the Will was duly and validly executed and that cannot be done by simply proving that the signature on the Will was that of the testator, as the propounder must also prove that the attestations were made properly, as required by Section 63(c) of the Succession Act. These observations were affirmed and quoted with approval by this Court in its later judgment in Lalitaben Jayantilal Popat vs. Pragnaben Jamnadas Kataria and others.
"Just came here to get an opinion, now it is becoming complicated." Complication is only because the relevant and maerial facts have not been disclosed.
"The community should understand that everyone here, are not law graduates. Just give some suggestion that common man can understand. I have come to a wrong platform I believe"
Any meaningful suggestion requires that the simple facts be disclosed avoiding subjective opinions. This is the elementary requirement even if one goes to a medical practitioner.
In the instant case the property belonged to both the parents. But only the father has executed the Will. If so, even if the Will, the nother's share in the property has devolved jointly upon all the legal heirs i.e. the querist and the siblings. It is of no consequence that the parents, during their lifetime, had given their properties.
Any person, during his lifetme, can deal with of dispose of his property during his lifetme. The only exception is ancestral property which is unique to Hindu personal law. And, any property, left intestate, devolves jointly upon all the legal heirs after their lifetme.
