Summary
The Court found no suspicious circumstance that displaced the evidence supporting the registered Will: the testator understood its effect and left other property for his widow and daughter. It also reiterated that written statements must specifically answer each plaint allegation, without evasive denials.
Issues
- Was the registered Will surrounded by suspicious circumstances sufficient to reject it?
- What do Order VIII Rules 3 and 5 require of a defendant’s written statement?
Provisions considered
- Order VIII Rules 3 and 5, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908A written statement must specifically admit or deny each allegation of fact in the plaint; a general or evasive denial is insufficient. A fact not specifically denied or stated to be not admitted is ordinarily taken as admitted, though the Court may require proof. Preliminary objections should be set out separately. (¶¶ 15, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.6)
Held
- The Will was not rendered suspicious by the testator’s health or by omission to name his widow and minor daughter: the evidence did not show that he lacked understanding, and other property was left for them. The High Court did not err in restoring the trial court’s decree upholding the Will. (¶¶ 8, 9.5, 10.1, 12, 13)
- Order VIII Rules 3 and 5 require specific, ordinarily paragraph-wise, admission or denial of each factual allegation. General or evasive denials are insufficient; facts not specifically denied or stated to be not admitted are ordinarily treated as admitted, subject to the Court’s discretion to require proof. (¶¶ 15, 15.1, 15.2)
- Preliminary objections should be stated in a separate set of paragraphs, and any additional pleadings should be clearly identified so the opposing party can answer them and the Court can understand the issues. (¶¶ 15.3, 15.6)
Result
Appeal dismissed; the High Court judgment and decree upholding the registered Will remained in force.