EXCLUSION OF NATURAL HEIRS FROM A WILL: SUPREME COURT REITERATES NEED FOR CLOSER SCRUTINY IN WILL THAT DENIES NATURAL HEIRS RIGHTS

BRIEF FACTS

The Supreme Court, in the case of Gurdial Singh (Dead Through LR) Vs Jagir Kaur (Dear through LR) (Civil Appeal No. 3509-3510 of 2010) (Decided on 17.07.2025) (Decided by Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Joymalya Baghchi) recently dealt with a dispute involving the validity of a Will executed by one Maya Singh. The Appellant, Maya Singh’s nephew, claimed that Singh had bequeathed his properties to him through a Will, completely excluding his wife, Jagir Kaur, from inheritance. Crucially, the Will did not even acknowledge the existence of Jagir Kaur, who asserted that she was the legally wedded wife and natural heir of the deceased.

 

While the Trial Court upheld the Will as genuine, the High Court reversed the decision, holding that the Will appeared suspicious due to the total omission of the wife’s identity and lack of justification for her exclusion. The matter reached the Supreme Court, where a Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Joymalya Bagchi examined whether the Will was executed freely and voluntarily or was tainted by suspicious circumstances and undue influence.

 

ISSUES OF LAW

• Whether the exclusion of a natural heir (such as a spouse) from a Will, without explanation, constitutes a suspicious circumstance affecting its validity.
• Whether the non-mention of the wife’s status in the Will and absence of any reason for her disinheritance are grounds to invalidate the Will.
• Whether mere registration of a Will suffices to establish its genuineness in the presence of suspicious circumstances.

 

REASONING BEHIND THE JUDGMENT

The Court reiterated that excluding natural heirs by itself does not invalidate a Will, since the purpose of making a Will is to alter the natural line of succession. However, prudence requires that reasons be provided for disinheriting close relatives such as spouses or children.

 

Citing Ram Piari v. Bhagwant & Ors. [(1993) 3 SCC 364], the Court emphasized that lack of justification for exclusion can give rise to suspicion about the voluntariness of the testator’s act. The Court also referred to Leela Rajagopal v. Kamala Menon Cocharan [(2014) 15 SCC 570], reaffirming that when unnatural features or omissions are present in a Will, close judicial scrutiny is warranted.

 

In this case, the non-mention of Jagir Kaur, despite her being the nominee for the deceased’s pension and having resided with him until his death, was a critical omission. The Court noted that there was no evidence of estrangement or animosity, and thus, no plausible reason for her exclusion.

 

The Supreme Court was also not persuaded by the Trial Court’s observation that the wife’s absence from the husband’s funeral rites indicated a strained relationship. The Court clarified that in Sikh families, funeral rites are traditionally performed by male relatives, and therefore, her absence had no legal bearing on the nature of the marital relationship.

 

The Judgment concluded that the entire Will appeared to be dictated by the Nephew, the main beneficiary, and not a product of the free will of the testator.

 

ANALYSIS

This ruling reaffirms the balanced approach of Indian courts in probate matters. While the freedom to bequeath property through a Will is constitutionally protected, it must be exercised transparently and voluntarily.

 

The Judgment clarifies that mere procedural compliance, such as registration of a Will, is not conclusive proof of its authenticity if surrounding circumstances raise doubts. The Court placed strong emphasis on the moral and legal responsibility of a testator to at least acknowledge close relations—if not bequeath to them—especially a spouse with whom the deceased shared a life till the end.

 

The erasure of marital status, particularly in the absence of any documentary or testimonial evidence indicating a falling out between the couple, was considered a red flag. The Judgment thus places a high burden on the propounder of the Will to dispel all suspicious circumstances when natural heirs are excluded without explanation.

 

CONCLUSION

The Supreme Court, by invalidating the Will in question, has sent a clear message: disinheritance of natural heirs must be deliberate and justified, and not a product of manipulation or undue influence. A Will that silently omits the spouse, despite evidence of continued cohabitation and affection, cannot be presumed to be the free expression of the testator’s mind.

 

This Judgment acts as an important precedent for future Will-related disputes and underlines the importance of clarity, transparency, and fairness in testamentary dispositions.

 

 

SARTHAK KALRA

Senior Legal Associate

The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services

 

EDITOR’S COMMENTS

In matters pertaining to wills, courts are always very sensitive to how the testator has bequeathed his/her estate. The court has to be satisfied about the genuineness of the will before granting any probate as the person who has made the last will is no more and hence what was on his/her mind can only be guessed but not proved. Hence, courts are very cautious while examining probate or succession matters. In this particular matter, the successor was only able to satisfy the court that the document had been registered but the absence of the long-standing wife of the testator certainly raised concerns as to why she was ousted from the will when she had normal relationship with her husband. Obviously, failure to mention her name or status in the will was a red flag that made the court doubt the genuineness of the will. The Supreme Court saved the widow from loosing her right to her husband’s property

 

SUSHILA RAM VARMA

Advocate & Chief Consultant

The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services

 

Please log onto our YouTube channel, The Indian Lawyer Legal Tips, to learn about various aspects of the law. Our latest Video, titled Uniform Civil Code Explained | Pros, Cons & Constitutional Perspective | Advocate Sushila Ram Varma| can be viewed at the link below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKJgw5k4kQU