Case law u/s 61 of Indian Succession Act, 1925

AIR1955 SC 363; [1955]1ITR 1035 (SC); [1955]1SCR1035

 (1989) 2 CALLT 164 (HC) Caalcutta High Court

Indubala Tikri case Chattisgarh High Court

Rajesh Chand Vs Dayawati & ors Delhi High Court

Tku v much Sirs. I will go through. Meanwhile any SC citation pls?
In my case, first the Defendants separated their mother from their plaintiff brother. In the guise of taking care of her hv obtained the Will from their mother before her death by emotionally blackmailing/coercing/brainwashing etc by taking advantage of her age, health etc with a malicious intention to deny the right of their plantiff brother in the scheduled properties.
The plaintiff has all documentary evidence to prove the other means by which they tried to obtain the properties by transferring to the name of their mother n deny the share of the plaintiff and/or atleast to get her mother's share, either during their mother's lifetime/after her death.

As a matter of fact the plaintiff n defendants mother didn't hv any immovable property in her name, as on the date of the Will. All i.e. self-earned n ancesstoral even till date stand in the name of her late husband i.e. plaintiff n defendants late father.
Solicit all of yr guidance, pls.

"In my case" - is it your personal problem or a case you are handling as a legal professional?

If the Mother was not the owner of the property, and all the property both movable and immovable property belongs to her pre  deceased  husband, than where is the question of fraud, coercion or impritunity of the will. If a person does not own any property how on earth can such man execute a will? Asmittedly the movanle property and immovable property stands in the name of the Father/Ancestral, and in absence of any WILL, the property should be distributed according to their personal laws of Succession. 

I am the plaintiff and party-in-person.

The defendants while the mother was alive, tried to get access to the property papers, so that they could get transferred to her name as she was the eldest person in the family. Once, the properties were transferred to her name, they could straight away alienate them without the knowledge of the plaintiff/if not , give him some share, not due share. The plaintiff foiled all their attempts n took all property papers to his custody, while agricultural land was/is still in father's name and residential properties were got transferred to mother's name by the plantiff while the originals were retained by the plaintiff photostate were given to the defendants. Meanwhile, one residential property has been sold by the defendent mother and sisters without the knowledge of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has produced certified copies of the sale deed to the court. With the help of the details in the photostats they tried to get duplicate title deeds by making her to sign a false affidavit stating that she lost the originals, while shifting. Couldn't succeed in obtaining, because of plaintiff's intervention. Next, they said, they will take care of her and took her to their houses. Their very purpose was atleast get her share additionally, if not entire property either during her life time or after her death.The mother was a puppet. Used to sign on any paper, any where told. While she was in their custody, one fine day, they hv taken her to a sub-registrar office, got typed the Will and made her to sign stating that after her death, her share (mother's share) in all the properties of her late husband's both ancestral as well as self earned should go to her daughter together with the daughter's due share. Now, the question is that when she herself is not there, where is her share? The Hindu Succession Act says, when a child is born, the property share gets enlarged. When a Karta and/or his wife dies, their share in the property gets shrunk. The properties should get distributed equally amongst brothers and sisters. Plaintiff's prayer before the court is also the same. Pls enlighten whether I am on the correct path.

The facts, subsequently posted, reveal thst the the author, as the palintiff-in-person, has been unable handle the proceedings with detachment and objectivity. Yes, it is rather a difficult for anyone, even a legal professional. However, the defcits are too apparent that the author will not able to do justice to himself unless wakes up to this reality without any further  loss of time. His postings speaks for themselves.

The author informs that his mother owned no properties; all the properties belonged to his late father. Obviously, the author overlooks the fact that, on the death of the father, the property is jointly vested in the mother and the siblings. She was competent to make Will for her share in the jointly held property, but not for the entire property,

Again, the author hastens to add that some of the properties have been  transferred to mother's name, probably in revenue or municipal records. As an advocate, the author ought to be in the know that such changes in the record do not amount to transfer of title.

May be,  there could be suspicious circumstances that sorround the execution of the Will because of coercion or undue influence. But those aspects need to be established in terms of the provsions of the Contract Act. Any citation pertaining to Section 61 of the Indian Succession Act may not be of much avail.

Moreover, it is rather too onerous to lead evidence as th the invalidity of a Will which has been duly registered,

The facts posted suggest that he has missed the basic concepts and has been pursuing misconceptions esp. as to citations. Please note that conceptions are not magic wands.

May be my words are harsh, but I am unable to make any other suggestions in the light of the facts posted. I hope the author would be magnanimous to condone my indiscretion and overreach. I once agan offer apology if I have hurt his sentiments. 

Tku v much Sir for the inputs. Am pleased rather, as I find myself in you.

Would b v much obliged, if u cud kindlyl clarify the following:
1. "As an advocate, the author ought to be in the know that such changes in the record do not amount to transfer of title".

2. Now, my mother i.e.first defendent is no more. What she has stated in the Will is "her share in all the properties coming from her late husband, shd b given to one of her defendent daughters with whom she is staying now". My mother was a housewife n had no income/properties of her own.

3. Am I bound to give my mother's share to my sister. If she were to be alive, giving her share would be legal. When she herself is not there, the question of her share doesn't arise, in my opinion.

4. Am fully confident of establishing with the backing of my exhibits, date-wise, their deep n well planned strategy and/or malicious intention behind it. That's is the reason why I asked any case law u/s 61 of the Indian Succession Act.

Further clarifications:
1. Agricultural land is in my father's name.

2. Two residential properties which were in my father's name, hv been transferred to my mother's name by me only, while we were in good terms.

3. All the necessary papers are in my custody only. Till now, I hv presented 40 exhibits, in support of my claim n lead evidence successfully, while they failed to produce even a single exhibit. Even their advocate also failed to establish even on a single count while cross-examining me.

4. Now, the suit is at the stage of the defence witness n their cross examination. I am cross examning their power of attorney holder I.e. my defendent sister's husband which has put my work at much ease, as neither he is aware of the facts nor my sisters in depth, except me. They are all back benchers only.

5. It was all their deep n well planned strategy/conspiracy, of which, I woke up n took the things to control, on time.

Hope, I am not wasting your time by my lengthy case history. Fully agree that it's challenging case. But am confident being successful with certain inputs from my learned professionals like you all.