Can Section 90 of Evidence Act either in its past or even amended form, be applied in probating a 50 year old Will, leading the court to "presume that the signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person’s handwriting, and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested"?
I am seeing different judgments where some judges are not entertaining it and others where it has been accepted in probating a Will. So, what is the generally accepted view nowadays?
This section might come in handy in a running probate suit where all witnesses are now dead, to waive the requirement for proving the signature of witnesses and that of the the testator as well.
