The Hon’ble High Court of #Delhi vide its Judgment dated 25.04.2020 has recently passed a significant ruling in the matter of Vickram Bahl & Anr. Vs. Siddhartha Bahl [CS(OS) 78/2016 & IAs No.2362/2016], holding that the rights in favour of the ultimate beneficiary under the mutual #Will accrue on the demise of either of the #executants and during the lifetime of the other #executant of the mutual Will.
The brief facts of the case involve Mrs. Sundri Bahl (‘second Defendant’) and Late Wing Commander N N Bahl who had executed a joint Will dated 31.03.2006. According to the Will, if one of the executors dies, the entire property shall go to the other executant. Here, Mr. Wing Commander N N Bahl had predeceased the second Defendant. Accordingly, after the demise of one spouse, the entire property is to “rest” with the other spouse and no one else shall have the right or interest in the share of the deceased’s share and after the #demise of both of them, their eldest son, grand-daughter (daughter of eldest son) and younger son will be absolute owners of their respective shares as detailed in the Will.
On the demise of Wing Commander N.N. Bahl, the
second Defendant became the sole owner of the property and was entitled to deal
with the property. Consequently, the second Defendant instituted a suit for
recovery of possession of the portions of the property in possession of the eldest
son and his daughter. This suit was pending before the Court of Additional
District Judge, Delhi.
As a result of the above Suit the eldest son of the Testators and his daughter (the Plaintiffs) had filed a #suit against his mother and brother inter alia seeking the relief of permanent injunction against his mother and brother (Defendants) from dis-possessing them from their respective share of the Suit property as per the said Will.
The two issues were put forth before this Court. The first one was whether the Will executed on 31.03.2006 qualifies as a mutual Will and the second with respect to the effect of Section 14(1) of the Hindu #Succession Act, 1956 (‘the Act’) on such bequeathal.
It is imperative to refer to the meaning of a
mutual will under law. Accordingly, in the case of Kochu Govindan Katmal v. T.T.
Lakshmiamma, [1959 AIR 71] the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
stated the meaning of a joint or mutual will which is as follows:
“A will is mutual when the two testators
confer upon each other reciprocal benefits as by either of them constituting
the other his legatee that is to say when the executants fill the roles of both
testator and legatee towards each other. But where the legatees are distinct
from the testators, there can be no position of a mutual will.”
Resultantly, in response to the first issue, the Bench comprising of Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw read the clauses of the Will and held that as evident from the language of the document that it contains an agreement. It further held that once such an agreement is found and the Will is found to be with respect to joint property and the Will of #Testators is contained in the same document, the same qualifies as a mutual Will. The Second Defendant, having accepted the said Will and after taking advantage thereunder cannot deal with the property, contravening her agreement with her deceased husband and is bound by the same.
The Bench while propounding the law in this
regard, held that “the rights
in favour of the ultimate beneficiary under the mutual Will are crystalized on
the demise of either of the executants and during the lifetime of the other
executant of the mutual Will”, and the beneficiary does not have to
wait till the death of both the executants, to enforce his rights. Accordingly, the Bench held that mutual Will shall
come into effect after the death of either of the joint executants.
With regard to the second issue, the Hon’ble
Court held that for applicability of Section 14(1) of the Act, possession of
the property by Hindu female on the date of commencement of the Act is sine qua non.
Section 14 in The Hindu Succession Act,
1956 states as follows;
14. Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute property.—
(1) Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired
before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full
owner thereof and not as a limited owner.
(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any
property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument or
under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award where the terms of
the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a
restricted estate in such property.
It was also held that it is incumbent for the
Hindu female to plead that the subject property was bequeathed to her in lieu
of a pre-existing right and since in the present case the second Defendant has
not pleaded, so she cannot claim an absolute right to the suit property under
Section 14(1) of the Act.
The Court finally held that “the principle of, a mutual Will coming into
effect and binding also on the testator
who may still be alive, on the death of one of the two testators, is well
enshrined in the Indian Law.” Resultantly, the Decree was passed, in favour
of the Plaintiffs and jointly and severally against the two Defendants.
Lakshmi
Vishwakarma
Associate
The Indian
Lawyer
Edited by
Sushila Ram Varma
Chief Consultant
The Indian
Lawyer