In Brief
The Supreme Court examined whether the non-mention of the testator's wife and reasons for her disinheritance in a will constitute suspicious circumstances vitiating its genuineness. The appellant nephew propounded a will in his favour, denying the respondent's status as the testator's lawful wife. While trial courts accepted the will based on proper execution, the High Court reversed this, finding the wife's complete omission from the will—without any stated reason despite her residing with him and being entitled to his pension—revealed the testator lacked a free disposing mind. The Court held that while mere disinheritance of heirs is not inherently suspicious, the cumulative circumstances here (non-mention coupled with undisputed marital status and close cohabitation) indicated undue influence and vitiated the will. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.