COURTKUTCHEHRY SPECIAL SERIES ON LANDMARKS JDUGEMENTS ON WILLS, CODICIL & PROBATE
Derek A C Lobo & Others v. Ulric M A Lobo (Dead) by Lrs. & Others: Supreme Court Confirms Probate of Mother’s Will
High Court’s Finding of Suspicion Overturned
Will Held Genuine, Probate Restored to Appellants
By Vishwas Kumar
New Delhi: March 19, 2026:
In Derek A C Lobo & Others v. Ulric M A Lobo (Dead) by Lrs. & Others (Civil Appeal No. 5094 of 2011, decided on 7 December 2023), the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling on the genuineness of a contested Will. The Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Kumar restored probate of the Will executed by the mother, which had disinherited some of her children, and set aside the High Court’s contrary findings.
The dispute revolved around whether the Will was genuine or clouded by suspicious circumstances. The High Court had invalidated the Will, citing doubts about its authenticity. However, the Supreme Court carefully examined the evidence and held that the Will was duly executed and proved in accordance with law. The Bench emphasized that no real suspicious circumstances existed, and the reasons given by the High Court were unsustainable either in law or on facts.
Also Read: Savitri Bai & Another v. Savitri Bai: Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Will Over Sale Deed
By confirming probate in favour of the appellants, the Court reinforced the principle that once a Will is validly executed and attested, and no credible suspicion remains, it must be given effect to. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding testamentary freedom while ensuring that challenges based on vague or unfounded suspicions do not override genuine documents.
This judgment is particularly important in succession law, as it highlights the evidentiary strength of properly proved Wills and provides clarity on the limits of judicial interference when no substantive doubts exist. It also reaffirms that probate, once granted on valid grounds, cannot be lightly disturbed.
Also Read: Thangam & Another v. Navamani Ammal: Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Registered Will
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
| 14.19 | Case Summary | : | Derek A C Lobo and Others v. Ulric M A Lobo (Dead) by Lrs. and Others |
| Court | : | Supreme Court of India | |
| Citations | : | (2023) 12 SC CK 0034: Civil Appeal No. 5094 of 2011 | |
| Link | : | https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1214480/derek-a-c-lobo-ors-vs-ulric-m-a-lobodead-by-lrs-ors/ | |
| Decided on | : | 07 December 2023 | |
| Coram | : | Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar | |
| Relevant Paragraphs | : | Para Nos. 1–21 |
1. Facts of the Case:
The appellants, sons of the deceased testatrix Cecelia Gertrude Lobo, sought probate of her Will dated 10.11.1992. Daughters (defendants 1 & 6) and one son (defendant 5) contested its genuineness. The trial court decreed the suit under Section 295 of the Succession Act, granting probate. The High Court reversed, finding the Will surrounded by suspicious circumstances.
2. Law Points Involved:
Proof and validity of Will — execution, attestation, and burden of proof — Sections 63, 63(c), 295 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872; burden shifting when suspicious circumstances are alleged; proof of execution as per Section 63 and attestation per Section 68.
3. Acts / Provisions / Articles Referred:
(i). Indian Succession Act, 1925 — Sections 63, 63(c), 295
(ii). Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 68
(iii). Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 8 Rule 9
4. Judgments Referred:
(i). Moturu Nalini Kanth v. Gainedi Kaliprasad, (2023) 11 SC CK 0020.
(ii). Gurdial Kaur v. Kartar Kaur, (1998) 03 SC CK 0042, https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/681010/gurdial-kaur-and-others-vs-kartar-kaur-and-others/
(iii). Nathia Bai v. Gangaram, (2009) 10 MP CK 0002.
(iv). Meenakshiammal (Dead) through LRs. v. Chandrasekharan, (2004) 11 SC CK 0050.
(v). P.P.K. Gopalan Nambiar v. P.P.K. Balakrishnan Nambiar, (1995) 03 SC CK 0039.
(vi). Madhukar D. Shende v. Tarabai Aba Shedage, (2002) 01 SC CK 0024.
https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/653626/madhukar-d-shende-vs-tarabai-aba-shedage/
(vii). Ramabai Padmakar Patil (D) through LRs. v. Rukminibai Vishnu Vekhande, (2003) 08 SC CK 0086,
5. Obiter Dicta:
Mere registration of a Will does not automatically confer validity; proof must meet requirements under Sections 63 & 68. Suspicious circumstances must be specifically pleaded not assumed before burden shifts to propounder. The presence of beneficiaries at execution does not ipso facto vitiate the Will unless undue influence is shown.
6. Ratio Decidendi:
Once the propounder proves due execution under Sections 63 & 68, the onus shifts to the contestant to establish suspicious circumstances. Vague or unpleaded suspicions do not invalidate a Will. Absence of the drafting advocate’s testimony or presence of beneficiaries at execution does not amount to suspicious circumstances. The High Court erred in reversing the trial court without factual foundation for suspicion.
Also Read: Lilian Coelho & Others v. Myra Philomena Coalho: Supreme Court Restores Scrutiny of Suspicious Wills
7. Final Ruling:
Appeal allowed. Judgment of the Karnataka High Court dated 21.11.2008 in M.F.A. No. 3077/2001 set aside. Trial Court decree dated 20.02.2001 granting probate restored. No order as to costs.
8. Gist (Dispute & Final Decision):
Dispute revolved around genuineness of a mother’s Will disinheriting some children. The High Court invalidated it citing “suspicious circumstances.” Supreme Court restored probate, holding that: (i) the Will was duly proved; (ii) no real suspicious circumstances existed; (iii) the High Court’s reasons were unsustainable in law or fact. Probate was accordingly confirmed in favour of the appellants.
Also Read: N.P. Saseendran v. N.P. Ponnamma & Ors.: Supreme Court Upholds Daughter’s Ownership Rights
Read full Judgement Here:
Also Read: Gopal Krishan & Others v. Daulat Ram & Others: Supreme Court Restores Validity of Will
|
Derek A C Lobo and Others v. Ulric M A Lobo (Dead) by Lrs. and Others |
|
Supreme Court of India |
|
(2023) 12 SC CK 0034: Civil Appeal No. 5094 of 2011. |
|
|
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-Friendly Keywords
- Derek A C Lobo v. Ulric M A Lobo Supreme Court judgment
- Civil Appeal No. 5094 of 2011 Will dispute
- Supreme Court ruling on probate India
- Suspicious circumstances in Will case law
- Testamentary freedom Supreme Court decision