This depends on which will you want to get validated by the court. Can't tell everything here.

A person can execute as many Wils as he wish during his life time. However, the last Will would prevail.  In your case Will executed in 2004 would be validated.

Even though the testator made a Will in the year 1998, he changed his mind to change the Will hence he had executed a new Will again in the year 2004. Therefore the intention of the testator to execute a new Will was clear that the previous Will stands cancelled. 

As per law the latest Will is legally valid and enforceable. 

You have not mentioned if the testator is living or passed away. 

Second will of 2004 supersedes earlier will 

Second will supersedes earlier will of 1998 

When the subsequent Will has been recognised as legally valid Will and is believed to be executed by the testator, then it will be considered as the valid Will, while the previous Will shall be null and void.

The last will date wise will be effective and other will not be considered

The latest WILL executed by the Testator in 2004 supercedes the previous registered WILL of 1998 and the old WILL becomes legally invalid.

Yes. It would automatically cancel the Will executed in 1998.  The Will executed in 2004 would prevail. 

the 2004 automatically cancels the previous 1998 Will

provided the 2004 Will is executed as per law

it is not necessary to write in the Will that this is my last and final Will

if the 2004 Will is not proved as per law then the 1998 Will will prevail, provided that Will is also proved as per law 

Subsequent will of 2004 would be valid if the  executor was of sound mind during the time of registration of the 2004 will. The previous will stands revoked on excution of new will. 

Yes. 2004 will revokes the previous wills of the executor.

Yes, the latest Will shall prevail in law as the deceased person's last Will and testament. the 2004 Will has automatically rendered the 1998 Will as null and void.

Dear Client,

The law is very clear in the subject. In case of two wills, irrespective of the date of will, the registered will prevails over the unregistered will. However, in case both wills are registered, the subsequent will shall prevail over the former one.

While making a new will, the testator should mention about earlier wills (with date) and that the last will stands cancelled/amended.

A will can only be canceled by the testator. A power of attorney does not grant the right to revoke a will.

Thank You.

Yes 

There is no need to mention specifically in the later Will that the earlier one stands cancelled. In law, It is the last written Will that stands, rendering all previous ones null and void.

Last will supersedes earlier will of 1998 

The latest Will shall prevail over the previous Will.

Since both the Wills have been prepared by a registered document, it may be deemed that the previous Will remains cancelled or invalid especially when the testator has specifically mentioned in the latest Will that it was his last Will.

Yes. It's implied if the 2004 will is the last will, then the earlier wills stood revoked.

Yes then the last will chronological will be lastest and last will

i make a Will on 1.1.2022

later on i make a second Will on 2.2.22

in the second will i do not write specifically that my first will dated 1.1.2022 is cancelled or revoked

so what this means is this - upon making of my second will dated 2.2.22 and without writing in it that my first will has been revoked, the 1st will gets automatically revoked, provided the 2nd will is proved to be executed and attested as per law

hope this clears your doubt 

Dear Client,

A will can be changed as many times as the testator wants to. Once a fresh will is made, the previous one stands revoked.

While making a new will or codicil, the testator should mention about earlier wills (with date) and that the last will stands cancelled/amended.

Thank You.

The latest WILL is the valid one as it automatically negates any older ones. Though the WILL can be challenged, and in case it is challenged at the time of probate, then the authenticity and validity would need to be proved. The court shall validate the latest WILL unless it can be proved it was created improperly, fraudulently, or unwillingly.

These cases are very common in various Courts of India and Supreme Court of India. I can understand your concern in this regard.

In P. Manavala Chetty and Ors. v. P. Ramanujam Chetty and Anr. (1971) a single judge of the Madras High Court on the duty of the court of construction to give intention to the wishes of the testator opined:

"It is the obvious duty of the Court to ascertain and give effect to the true intentions of the testator and also avoid any construction of the will which will defeat or frustrate or bring about a situation which is directly contrary to the intentions of the testator. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that there are obvious limits to this doctrine that the Court should try to ascertain and give effect to the intentions of the testator. The law requires a will to be in writing and it cannot, consistently with this doctrine, permit parol evidence or evidence of collateral circumstances to be adduced to contradict or add to or vary the contents of such a will. No evidence, however powerful it may be, can be given in a Court of construction in order to complete an incomplete will, or project back a valid will, if the terms and conditions of the written will are useless and in-effective to amount to a valid bequest, or to prove any intention or wish of the testator not found in the will. The testator's declarations or evidence of collateral circumstances cannot control the operation of the clear provisions of the will. The provisions of the Indian Succession Act referred to earlier indicate the limits of the Court's power to take note of the testator's declarations and the surroundings circumstances, i.e., evidence of collateral circumstances."

Section 73 of Indian Succession Act, Sub-section (1) & (2) says:

(1) No unprivileged will or codicil, nor any part thereof, which has been revoked in any manner herein before required, & showing an intention to revive the same.

(2) When any Will or codicil, which has been partly revoked and afterwards wholly revoked, is revived, such revival shall not extend to so much thereof as has been revoked before the revocation of the whole thereof, unless an intention to the contrary is shown by the Will or codicil.

So, the only way in which an unprivileged will or codicil can be revoked have been specified there to be

(1) marriage

(2) another will or codicil

(3) some writing declaring an intention to revoke the same & executed in the manner in which an unprivileged will is required to be executed, or

(4) the burning, tearing or otherwise destroying the same by the testator, etc. 

If the mode adopted by the testatrix is not one of the four modes which are prescribed in Section 70 of Indian Succession Act, the revocation of the unprivileged will or codicil cannot be brought about. Therefore, it is necessary to see the contents of both the wills for concrete opinion. Intention of words needs to be looked into.

You may contact my secretary to connect with me for clarification.

Gopal Verma,

Advocate on Record & Amicus Curiae,

Supreme Court of India