Non-registration alone cannot make a Will suspicious, says Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has clarified that the mere non-registration of a Will cannot be treated as a suspicious circumstance casting doubt on its genuineness, since the law does not mandate the registration of Wills.

A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Vijay Bishnoi also held that the exclusion of natural heirs from a Will does not automatically make the document suspicious, noting that the very purpose of executing a Will is to alter the normal line of succession.

The court upheld the validity of a Will executed in 1983 by B Sheena Nairi, who bequeathed his agricultural and other properties in Karnataka to his sister, Laxmi Nairthy.

Nairi was a permanent resident of Mumbai and worked as a chartered accountant with five reputed companies. Besides owning a residential flat in Mumbai, he also owned substantial immovable properties in Brahmavar and Chanthar village in Karnataka’s Udupi taluk, consisting primarily of agricultural land and ancestral properties.

The court rejected the challenge mounted by his wife and children, through their legal representatives, who alleged that the Will was forged and fabricated.

“There is nothing in law which requires the registration of a Will and wills are in a majority of cases not registered at all. To draw any inference against the genuineness of the Will on the ground of its non-registration appears to us to be wholly unwarranted,” the bench said.

The court relied on its earlier judgment in Ishwardeo Narain Singh Vs Kamta Devi (1953) to reinforce the position. The appellants had questioned the Will primarily on the ground that it was unregistered, apart from alleging forgery.

Dismissing the contention, the court said that while suspicious circumstances surrounding a Will may call for closer scrutiny, non-registration by itself does not qualify as one.

"A testator is legally entitled to dispose of his property according to his own wishes, and unless the exclusion is accompanied by suspicious circumstances affecting the genuineness or due execution of a Will, such exclusion alone does not render a Will invalid," the bench said.

The court emphasised the exclusion of the natural heirs cannot be sufficient to vitiate the Will in question, particularly when the Will clearly specifies that the testator has not done any injustice to his wife, children, or other relatives, and that he has given enough to his wife and children who are residing in Mumbai.

The bench further clarified that mutation entries in revenue records do not confer any title on a person, as they are made only for fiscal purposes. 

The court observed that the Will was duly proved through the testimony of an attesting witness, who confirmed that the testator had executed the document voluntarily and while in a sound state of mind. 

The appellants, despite raising allegations of forgery, failed to produce any evidence to support their claims.

Dismissing the appeal, the court found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the trial court, the first appellate court, and the Karnataka High Court.