Will — Evidence — Genuineness of will — Attesting witness — Requirement of law — Evidence Act, section 68.

In an application for grant of probate of the will, the issue arose as to genuineness of the will. The respondent Pooran Singh through his father and natural guardian Shishupal Singh had filed an application before the Trial Court seeking probate of the will executed by Joothar Singh in favour of Pooran Singh. It was submitted before the Court that so far as genuineness of the will was concerned, it created a suspicion, since most of the witnesses were illiterate, they did not know the contents of the will and that they being either relatives or acquaintance of the said Shishupal Singh, the possibility could not be denied that they had put their thumb marks below the said writing at the instance of Shishupal Singh. The Court observed that concerned witness Shri Tarachand in whose handwritings the said will was written had specifically stated in his evidence that he had written as per the direction of Joothar Singh and in presence of the witnesses Hari Singh, Raghunath Singh, Shishupal Singh and others.

He had also stated that after the writing was over, he had read over the same to Joothar Singh and thereafter Joothar Singh and the witnesses had put their thumb marks. Apart from the fact that other witnesses Hari Singh, Brij Singh, Raghunath Singh and Shishupal Singh have corroborated the said version, no such suggestion was put to them in their respective cross-examination that the thumb mark of Joothar Singh was obtained on plain paper and the writing thereon was made subsequently by Tarachand or Shishupal Singh and thumb marks of other witnesses were also put subsequently.

There is no requirement of law that the attesting witness should know the contents of the will. The only requirement is that the testator of the will should put his signature or thumb mark, as the case may be, in presence of two or more witnesses and that the said witnesses also should put their signatures in presence of the testator.

 In the instant case, the said witness had stated that Joothar Singh had put his thumb mark below the said writing of the will and they had also put their respective thumb marks and signatures on the said will. Therefore, in absence of any substantial defence put up in the evidence by the defendants, the suspicion raised in the present appeal could not be said to be well founded.