The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted probate of a registered Will after conclusively establishing its due execution by two attesting witnesses and confirming the testator’s sound state of mind. The judgment reinforces the legal principle that when a Will is properly executed, registered, and unchallenged by any interested party, courts must uphold its validity without requiring additional proof of testamentary capacity beyond what is provided by the attesting witnesses.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Ira Srivastava, filed a petition under Sections 22, 273, and 276 of the Indian Succession Act seeking probate of the Will dated 03.11.2023 executed by her father, late Shri Dileep Srivastava, resident of Birch Court, Nirvana Country, Sector 50, Gurugram, Haryana. The Will bequeathed all moveable and immovable properties, including assets in Gurugram and Noida, Uttar Pradesh, and bank accounts across Delhi, Kolkata, and Mumbai, to the petitioner’s mother, Respondent No.2, Ms. Rita Srivastava. Respondents No.2 and No.3 (the wife and second daughter of the deceased) have no objection to the grant of probate. The General Public was served through publication in multiple newspapers, with no objections raised.
Key Facts
- The deceased, Shri Dileep Srivastava, died on 08.02.2025. Death Certificate (Ex.PW3/1) was produced.
- The Will was executed on 03.11.2023 and registered on the same date with the Sub-Registrar, Wazirabad, Gurugram, as Document No.920 in Bahi No.3 Jild No.8 and Additional Bahi No.3 Jild No.212.
- The Will was drafted by Advocate Ram Niwas and signed by the testator at Points A to F on pages 1 - 6.
- Two attesting witnesses were present: Jasjive Singh Oberoi and Deepak.
- Both witnesses attested the Will at Points G and H respectively.
- The testator acknowledged execution before the Sub-Registrar and signed at Points J and K on the reverse of pages 1 and 2.
- Witnesses Jasjive Singh Oberoi and Deepak signed at Points L and M on the reverse of page 2.
- The Will was exhibited as Ex.PW1/1; original was shown to the Court and returned.
- Both witnesses submitted affidavits dated 01.11.2025 and 30.11.2025 (Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW2/A) and supplementary affidavits dated 07.04.2025 (Ex.PW1/2 and Ex.PW2/1).
- The petitioner produced additional documents: Death Certificate (Ex.PW3/1), list of assets (Ex.PW3/2), No Objection Certificates from Respondents No.2 and No.3 (Ex.PW3/3 and Ex.PW3/4), newspaper publications (Ex.PW3/5 - Ex.PW3/8), certified copies of conveyance deeds (Ex.PW3/11 and Ex.PW3/12), and ledger records (Ex.PW3/13).
- No cross-examination was conducted by Respondents No.2 and No.3 on any of the witnesses.
Procedural History
- 03.11.2023: Will executed and registered by Sub-Registrar, Wazirabad, Gurugram.
- 08.02.2025: Death of testator, Dileep Srivastava.
- 21.03.2025: Respondent No.2 (wife) executed No Objection Certificate.
- 27.03.2025: Respondent No.3 (daughter) executed No Objection Certificate.
- 13.11.2025: First attesting witness, Jasjive Singh Oberoi, examined before the Court.
- 13.11.2025: Second attesting witness, Deepak, examined before the Court.
- 21.01.2026: Petitioner appeared and produced documentary evidence.
- 08.04.2026: Judgment delivered by the High Court.
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought probate of the Will dated 03.11.2023 to establish her right as the executor and to enable legal administration of the estate in accordance with the testator’s wishes.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the due execution of a registered Will, supported by the sworn affidavits of two attesting witnesses who confirmed the testator’s sound mind and voluntary execution, is sufficient to grant probate in the absence of any objection or suspicious circumstance.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner relied on the affidavits of both attesting witnesses, Jasjive Singh Oberoi and Deepak, who testified that the testator was of sound disposing mind, voluntarily executed the Will, and signed it in their presence. Both witnesses confirmed the Will was read out by the testator before the Sub-Registrar, who registered it after verifying identity and execution. The petitioner emphasized that the Will was registered under the Indian Registration Act, which carries a statutory presumption of authenticity under Section 67 of the Indian Evidence Act. No objection was raised by the General Public despite due publication, and the beneficiaries (Respondents No.2 and No.3) expressly consented.
For the Respondent
Respondents No.2 and No.3 did not contest the petition. Their counsel offered no counter-arguments and declined to cross-examine the petitioner’s witnesses. The Court noted their silence and non-opposition as acquiescence to the validity of the Will.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the evidence under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, which requires proof of the due execution of a Will. It held that the affidavits of the two attesting witnesses, Jasjive Singh Oberoi and Deepak, were clear, consistent, and mutually corroborative. Both witnesses described the same sequence of events: the testator’s presence, reading of the Will, signing at designated points, attestation by them, and registration before the Sub-Registrar.
"Shri Dileep Srivastava was of a sound and disposing state of mind at the time of execution of the said Will and even thereafter."
The Court emphasized that the testator’s mental capacity was explicitly affirmed by both witnesses, and no contrary evidence or suspicion was raised. The registration of the Will under the Indian Registration Act further strengthened its authenticity, as registration creates a rebuttable presumption of due execution under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act.
The Court also noted that the Will was natural, as it bequeathed the entire estate to the deceased’s wife, with whom he had a long-standing marital relationship. The absence of any challenge from the General Public, despite publication, and the express consent of the beneficiaries, removed any doubt regarding the Will’s legitimacy.
The Court distinguished this case from those involving contested Wills or suspicious circumstances, such as alterations, lack of witnesses, or undue influence, which require heightened scrutiny. Here, the evidence was unimpeached, unchallenged, and complete.
The Verdict
The petition succeeded. The Court granted probate of the registered Will dated 03.11.2023 executed by late Shri Dileep Srivastava. The order confirms the petitioner’s right to act as executor and authorizes her to administer all moveable and immovable properties bequeathed under the Will. All pending applications are disposed of. The judgment is final and binding.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Probate Requires No Extraordinary Proof When Will Is Registered and Unchallenged
- Practitioners may rely on registered Wills supported by affidavits of attesting witnesses as sufficient proof of due execution under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act.
- No additional evidence of testamentary capacity is required if the witnesses affirm the testator’s sound mind and voluntary execution.
- Silence or non-opposition from beneficiaries and the public, after due notice, constitutes tacit acceptance.
Registration Under the Indian Registration Act Is a Powerful Presumption
- A registered Will carries a statutory presumption of authenticity under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act.
- Courts may dispense with further proof of execution if the registration record and witness affidavits are consistent and unchallenged.
- The burden shifts to any objector to raise specific, credible grounds of suspicion.
Beneficiary Consent Reduces Litigation Risk
- When all beneficiaries consent to probate, courts are more likely to grant it summarily.
- Practitioners should always obtain and file No Objection Certificates from all beneficiaries to expedite probate proceedings.
- Publication in newspapers remains mandatory, but absence of objections after publication is a decisive factor in favor of grant.
