Ashutosh Samanta (D) By LRs. & Ors. vs Sm. Ranjan Bala Dasi & Ors.
Background
A man named Gosaidas Samanta died in 1929 leaving a will that divided his property among two of his sons and a grandson, leaving out his third son, Upendra. Decades later, the appellant, who had bought part of the property from Upendra, disputed the will when the respondent (grandson of one of the named heirs) applied for "letters of administration" (court permission to administer the deceased's estate under the will) since the will itself had never been formally proved in court. Both attesting witnesses to the 1929 will had died by the time of the case, so the courts had to rely on other evidence, including the testator's sons' testimony, a related 1945 partition deed, and Upendra's own signed acknowledgment of the will.
Decision Breakdown
The trial court and the Calcutta High Court both found the will genuine and granted letters of administration, and the appellant challenged this before the Supreme Court, arguing among other things that the courts wrongly relied on the "30-years-old document" presumption under Section 90 of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court agreed that Section 90's presumption of genuineness for old documents does not, by itself, prove a will: a will must specifically be proved under Section 63 of the Succession Act and Section 68 of the Evidence Act (which normally requires examining an attesting witness). However, since both attesting witnesses were dead, Section 69 of the Evidence Act allowed proof by other means, such as identifying the handwriting/signatures through other credible witnesses. The Court found that the testimony of the testator's sons and another witness who had actually seen the will being signed, combined with the corroborating 1945 partition deed and Upendra's own signed document referencing the will, was sufficient proof. The appeal was dismissed and the will upheld.
Lesson Learnt
A very old document is not automatically treated as a validly executed will just because of its age: a will must still be proved through witnesses or, if the original attesting witnesses have died, through other credible evidence establishing the signatures and circumstances of its execution.