Hyderabad: Telangana high court has ruled that the burden of proving a will’s authenticity lies squarely on its propounder (executor who presents a will to a court), who must dispel all legitimate doubts to satisfy the court’s conscience.A division bench of Justice K Lakshman and Justice BR Madhusudhan Rao dismissed an appeal over a disputed will allegedly executed in 1964, rejecting its validity and the claim of exclusive ownership over a G+1 house built on 275 square yards in Feelkhana area.The case stemmed from a family dispute between Dr Prabhuji Patange, a city‑based medical practitioner, and his sisters, Dr Amrutha and Dr Asha, regarding a will said to have been executed by their late father, Krishnarao Patange, a cloth merchant and moneylender.Dr Patange argued that his father left behind an unregistered will granting their mother a restricted life interest in the property, with absolute ownership passing to him after her death.He claimed to have discovered the sealed document in an almirah only after his mother’s demise in 1999. When his sisters refused to vacate the first floor, he filed a title suit, which was dismissed by a city civil court in 2006.His sisters branded the will a forgery, stressing that their father was healthy in 1964 with no reason to draft such a document, and pointing out that Dr Patange initiated litigation nearly 23 years after their father’s death in 1979.Delivering judgment recently, the high court noted several suspicious circumstances: One daughter’s name was omitted entirely; properties mentioned in the will were later sold by the father himself; and the document remained undiscovered for two decades after his death.The bench also observed that all three attesting witnesses had died. Though Dr Patange summoned the son of one witness to verify handwriting, discrepancies in surnames emerged. The appellant further failed to seek expert biometric opinions or provide contemporaneous signatures for comparison.Finding no grounds to disturb the lower court’s well‑reasoned decree, the bench confirmed that the suspicious elements surrounding the will remained unresolved and dismissed the appeal.
