<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (5) TMI 661 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276382</link>
    <description>A Will must be proved by strict compliance with the statutory requirements of execution and attestation, ordinarily through at least one attesting witness who can speak to the testator&#039;s signature or thumb impression and the witnesses&#039; own attestation. In this article&#039;s analysis, inconsistent witness testimony, an insufficiently proved attesting role, and registration endorsements were held inadequate to establish due execution. Secondary evidence of the Will was also treated as unavailable because the loss of the original was not satisfactorily proved, and registration records proved registration only, not attestation. Suspicious circumstances therefore remained unexplained, and the propounder failed to discharge the burden of proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2018 15:31:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 661 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276382</link>
      <description>A Will must be proved by strict compliance with the statutory requirements of execution and attestation, ordinarily through at least one attesting witness who can speak to the testator&#039;s signature or thumb impression and the witnesses&#039; own attestation. In this article&#039;s analysis, inconsistent witness testimony, an insufficiently proved attesting role, and registration endorsements were held inadequate to establish due execution. Secondary evidence of the Will was also treated as unavailable because the loss of the original was not satisfactorily proved, and registration records proved registration only, not attestation. Suspicious circumstances therefore remained unexplained, and the propounder failed to discharge the burden of proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276382</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>