COURTKUTCHEHRY SPECIAL SERIES ON LANDMARKS JDUGEMENTS ON WILLS, CODICIL & PROBATE
A. Wilson Prince v. Nazar and Others: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea for Copy of 1972 Probated Will
Probate Attained Finality, Records Lawfully Destroyed
Petitioner’s Claim Termed a “Wild Goose Chase”
By Vishwas Kumar
New Delhi: March 20, 2026:
Also Read: Kavita Kanwar v. Pamela Mehta & Ors.: Supreme Court Rejects Probate of Suspicious Will
In A. Wilson Prince v. Nazar and Others (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17303 of 2022, decided on 5 May 2023), the Supreme Court of India addressed a peculiar succession-related petition involving a decades-old probate. The petitioner sought a copy of a Will that had been probated in 1972, claiming entitlement as a descendant.
The Division Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal noted that the probate proceedings had long attained finality, with the estate settled as early as 1973. Importantly, the Court observed that the records pertaining to the probate had been destroyed in 1998 in accordance with statutory procedure. The petitioner admitted to never having seen the Will and failed to establish any legal entitlement to the estate.
Also Read: Top 123 Supreme Court Judgments on Wills
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s refusal to intervene, describing the petitioner’s pursuit as a “wild goose chase.” The Court emphasized that once probate has been granted and the estate settled, the matter achieves finality and cannot be reopened decades later speculative claims. The destruction of records, carried out under statutory rules, further reinforced the impossibility of revisiting the issue.
This ruling highlight the judiciary’s firm stance on the sanctity of probate proceedings and the importance of finality in succession matters. It underscores that courts will not entertain belated or speculative claims, especially when the estate has already been distributed and records lawfully disposed of.
By dismissing the petition, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that inheritance disputes must be pursued within the framework of law and within reasonable timelines, ensuring certainty and stability in property succession.
For More, Read Here the Summary of the Judgement from the Book: WILL WRITING SIMPLIFIED, read below or open page no 436, Chapter 14.1 in the book. (Online book purchase link available here on: Buy online: Amazon | Flipkart
|
|
Case Summary |
: |
A. Wilson Prince v. Nazar and Others |
|
|
Court |
: |
Supreme Court of India |
|
|
Citations |
: |
(2023) 05 SC CK 0043: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17303 of 2022. |
|
|
Link |
: |
https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1163968/a-wilson-prince-vs-nazar-ors/ |
|
|
Decided on |
: |
15 May 2023 |
|
|
Coram |
: |
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal, (Division Bench) |
|
|
Relevant Paragraphs |
: |
Para Nos. 1–22 |
Also Read: V. Prabhakara v. Basavaraj K. (Dead) by LRs & Another: Supreme Court Upholds Registered Will
1. Facts of the Case:
Rev. Salusbury Fynes Davenport, owner of extensive properties, died on 24.01.1972 at Ooty leaving a Will dated 19.07.1969 appointing M/s King & Partridge as executors. Probate was granted on 29.07.1972 in O.P. No.15/1972 by the Sub-Court, Udhagamandalam, and the executor duly filed inventory and final accounts under Section 317 of the Indian Succession Act. In 2016, one Mary Brigit sought a copy of the probate and Will; on non-supply, she filed W.P. No.11266/2018 seeking mandamus to direct the authorities to furnish the same. The High Court dismissed her petition holding that the records of O.P.15/1972 had been lawfully destroyed under the Destruction of Records Act, 1917. Her successor, A. Wilson Prince, alone pursued the matter through SLP before the Supreme Court.
2. Law Points Involved:
(i). Preservation and custody of original Wills filed for probate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
(ii). Destruction of judicial records under the Destruction of Records Act, 1917.
(iii). Maintainability of writ petition or SLP when the original Will and probate record are untraceable.
(iv). Scope of judicial relief where claim is based purely on conjecture regarding testamentary benefit.
3. Acts / Provisions / Articles Referred:
(i). Indian Succession Act, 1925-Sections 222(1), 272 and 317;
(ii). Destruction of Records Act, 191-procedure for destruction of old records;
(iii). Civil Rules of Practice (“Preservation and Inspection of Wills”).
4. Judgments Referred:
High Court of Madras (Division Bench) judgment in W.P. No. 11266 of 2018,
Mary Brigit v. Registrar General, Madras High Court & Ors., dismissed 25.11.2021.
5. Obiter Dicta:
The Court observed that though original Wills filed for probate ordinarily ought to be preserved or returned to the executor, after half a century it is impossible to trace or reconstruct events. A mere speculative claim without even seeing the Will cannot justify judicial investigation. Courts cannot embark upon a “treasure hunt” based on guesses.
6. Ratio Decidendi:
Where the probate proceedings were lawfully concluded decades earlier, the estate fully administered, and no authenticated copy or proof of the Will exists, courts cannot reopen or direct fresh inquiry merely because a descendant suspects undisclosed bequests. The burden of establishing existence and contents of the Will lies on the claimant; conjecture is insufficient.
7. Final Ruling:
The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP. It held that the Will of 1969 and the probate record had either been lawfully destroyed or returned long ago, and that no mandamus or inquiry could be issued after such lapse of time. No costs.
8. Gist – Dispute and Decision:
The dispute revolved around a descendant’s demand for a copy of a Will probated in 1972. The Court found that the probate had long attained finality, the estate was settled in 1973, and the records were destroyed in 1998 following statutory procedure. The petitioner, never having seen the Will or proven any entitlement, was held to be on a “wild goose chase.” The Court upheld the High Court’s refusal to intervene and dismissed the petition.
Read full Judgement Here:
A. Wilson Prince v. Nazar and Others
Supreme Court of India
(2023) 05 SC CK 0043: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17303 of 2022.
https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1163968/a-wilson-prince-vs-nazar-ors/
Also Read: Meena Pradhan and Others v. Kamla Pradhan and Another: Supreme
You Can Also Purchase the Book from here on: Buy online: Amazon | Flipkart
OUR RECOMMENDATION: Check out 123 Key Judgements, as highlighted in the book, WILL WRITING SIMPLIFIED, for the quick research and reference purposes. Click the link here: https://www.courtkutchehry.com/pages/blog/123-supreme-court-judgments-on-wills/
SEO Keywords
-
- Wilson Prince v. Nazar case
- Supreme Court probate Will dispute 2023
- Civil SLP No. 17303 of 2022 Supreme Court
- Probate finality succession India
- Will records destroyed statutory procedure
- Supreme Court inheritance law ruling