Rampyare & Anr v. Ramkishun, 2026
It clarified that registration alone does not validate a Will, highlighting the statutory safeguards of Sections 63, 68 & 69.
Judgement Details
Court
Chhattisgarh High Court
Date of Decision
2 February 2026
Judges
Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
The appellant filed a civil suit seeking declaration of title, possession, and permanent injunction over land based on a registered Will of 1958, allegedly executed by his grandfather.
-
The respondent (appellant’s uncle) challenged the validity of the Will, claiming the property was ancestral and alleging forgery.
-
Trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the Will was not duly proved under Section 63 of Indian Succession Act and Sections 68 & 69 IEA.
-
Appellate Court upheld the Trial Court’s decision.
-
The appellant argued that the Will being more than 30 years old should attract the presumption under Section 90 IEA, as attesting witnesses had passed away.
-
High Court examined whether the presumption under Section 90 could apply to a Will.
Issues
-
Whether the presumption under Section 90 IEA applies to Wills more than 30 years old?
-
Whether a Will can be proved without strict compliance with execution and attestation provisions under Section 63 Indian Succession Act?
-
Whether registration of a Will dispenses with the mandatory proof by attesting witnesses?
-
Whether absence or death of attesting witnesses alone is sufficient to invoke Section 90 IEA for Wills?
-
Whether a claim of long possession of property can substitute for proper proof of a Will?
Judgement
-
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding Trial and Appellate Courts.
-
It held that Section 90 IEA does not apply to Wills, even if more than 30 years old.
-
The Court emphasized that a Will remains revocable during the lifetime of the testator and speaks only from the death of the testator.
-
Strict compliance with Section 63 ISA and Sections 68 & 69 IEA is mandatory to prove a Will.
-
Mere registration of the Will or long possession of property does not dispense with mandatory proof requirements.
Held
-
Presumption under Section 90 IEA cannot be invoked for Wills.
-
Execution and attestation of Wills must comply strictly with statutory provisions.
-
Death or absence of witnesses does not automatically prove a Will.
-
Claims based solely on antiquity of the Will or possession of property are insufficient to establish title.
Analysis
-
The Court reaffirmed the principle that Wills require strict proof, distinguishing them from other documents eligible for presumption under Section 90 IEA.
-
It clarified that registration alone does not validate a Will, highlighting the statutory safeguards of Sections 63, 68 & 69.
-
Emphasized that a Will’s revocability during lifetime of testator prevents reliance on mere antiquity.
-
Reinforced the importance of attesting witnesses as the cornerstone of proving Wills.
-
The ruling ensures that property rights based on Wills cannot bypass procedural safeguards even for very old Wills.