Understanding the Supreme Court Judgment on Will Execution

On January 2, 2025, the Supreme Court of India Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal ruled that mere registration of a will does not automatically validate it; proper execution according to legal requirements is essential. The Supreme Court delivered its judgment in the case of Leela & Ors. v. Muruganantham & Ors. The case involved a family dispute over property after the death of Balasubramaniya Thanthiriyar in 1991. His children from his first marriage and his second wife, along with her children, disagreed on who should inherit his property. The second wife and her children claimed rights based on a will allegedly made in 1990, while the first wife’s children challenged its authenticity. The court’s decision clarified that a registration will alone is not enough to prove its validity; it must also follow all legal requirements.

Background of the Case on Will Registration

The dispute arose within a family over the estate of the late Balasubramaniya Thanthiriyar. In 1989, he executed a partition deed dividing his properties into four schedules:

First Schedule: Retained by Balasubramaniya himself.

Second Schedule: Allotted to his first wife.

Third Schedule: Allotted to his children from the first marriage.

Fourth Schedule: Allotted to his children from the second marriage.

After Balasubramaniya’s death in 1991, his children from the first marriage filed a suit seeking a 5/7th share in the properties listed in the First Schedule. In response, the appellants (the second wife and her sons) claimed exclusive rights to the First Schedule properties based on an unregistered Will dated April 6, 1990, purportedly executed by Balasubramaniya.

Legal Issues related to Will Registration

The central issues before the Court were:

Validity of the Unregistered Will: Whether the unregistered Will dated April 6, 1990, was valid and executed in compliance with legal requirements.

Proof of Execution: Whether the appellants had satisfactorily proven the execution of the Will as mandated by law.

In the previous analysis, I discussed the Supreme Court’s decision in Leela & Ors. v. Muruganantham & Ors. (2025 INSC 10) and its emphasis on the necessity of proving a will’s execution in accordance with legal requirements. Specifically, the Court highlighted that mere registration of a will does not automatically confer validity; the execution must be proven as per the mandates of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Relevant Legal Provisions

Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925: This section outlines the formal requirements for the execution of a will, including the necessity for the testator’s signature and attestation by at least two witnesses.

Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: This section mandates that for a document required by law to be attested (such as a will), at least one attesting witness must be called to prove its execution, if such a witness is available.

These provisions were central to the Court’s analysis in determining the validity of the will in question.

Legal Requirements for a Will Registration

Under Indian law, a will must follow certain rules to be valid:

• The person making the will (testator) must sign it.
• At least two witnesses must see the testator sign the will and sign it themselves.
• If someone challenges the will, at least one witness must testify in court that the testator signed it willingly and was of sound mind.

Court’s Analysis and Reasoning

The Supreme Court ruled that the second wife and her children did not provide enough proof that the 1990 will was properly executed. The key reasons were:

Proof of Execution: The Court reiterated that the propounder of a Will must establish by satisfactory evidence that:

• The Will was signed by the testator.
• At the time of signing, the testator was of sound mind and understood the nature and effect of the dispositions.
• The testator signed the Will voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence.

In this case, the appellants failed to produce adequate evidence to prove these essential elements. The attesting witness’s statement that the Will was read to the testator was deemed insufficient to establish proper execution.

Suspicious Circumstances: The Court identified several suspicious circumstances surrounding the alleged Will:

• Health of the Testator: At the time of the purported execution, the testator was in poor health, casting doubt on his capacity to execute the Will.
• Location of Execution: The Will was allegedly executed far from the testator’s residence in Madurai, raising questions about the authenticity of the circumstances.
• Unregistered Will: The fact that the Will was unregistered added to the suspicion, especially given the substantial change in the disposition of properties it purported to effect.

         These factors led the Court to conclude that the execution of the Will was not free from doubt.

Registration of the Will: The Court emphasized that mere registration of a Will does not automatically confer validity. Even if a Will is registered, it must still be proven in accordance with the legal mandates under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Section 68 of the Evidence Act. The Court stated, “Mere registration of a Will would not attach to it a stamp of validity.”

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling highlight important points for people making or inheriting property through a will:

• Proper Execution is Essential: Simply writing and signing a will is not enough. It must be properly witnessed and meet all legal requirements.
• Registration Helps but is Not Enough: Registering a will can make it harder to challenge, but it does not automatically prove that the will is valid.
• Clear and Legal Wills Prevent Disputes: Families should ensure that wills are made legally to avoid conflicts after the testator’s death.

Final Thoughts on Case Analysis

In the Supreme Court’s judgment in Leela & Ors. v. Muruganantham & Ors. (2025 INSC 10), the Court emphasized that mere registration of a will does not automatically confer validity. The Court stated, “Mere registration of a Will would not attach to it a stamp of validity.”

The Court further highlighted the necessity of proving the execution of a will in accordance with legal mandates, specifically under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act. The judgment underscored that the propounder of the will must establish its execution by providing satisfactory evidence, including the attestation by witnesses as required by law.

Additionally, the Court noted that the mere statement of an attesting witness that the will was read to the testator is insufficient to prove its proper execution. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to the formal requirements prescribed by law to ensure the validity of a will.

The Supreme Court’s decision reinforces that proving a will is about more than just registration. It must be executed in line with legal requirements, with proper signatures and witnesses. Families should take legal guidance when drafting a will to prevent disputes and ensure their wishes are legally recognized.