Mr. X and Mr. Y are parents who earned properties in their own struggle and since it is a self acquired property, both of my mother and father made registered "Will" in the year 1980. We are 4 brothers and 2 sisters and as per the "Will" share was given to all 4 sons and made married of my two sisters to good family. All brothers also mutated properties into their respective names as per the Will We had 10 proprieties in which 8 properties covered under registered Will of 1980 and two left without any Will by my father during 1980. However, in 1992 in respect of two properties registered Will was made and given share to 1 son and 1 daughter & not said anything about previous will of 1980 or even of such 8 properties. Now one of the daughter filed case and claiming that as per the latest Will she got share but previous Will is not valid since latest Will survive. Questions 1. In the first "Will" of 1980 eight properties were covered & not said anything about remaining 2 properties but in the latest will of 1992 remaining two properties were covered and not said anything about previous Will or its properties, if such is the case whether previous will of 1980 becomes invalid even though such properties were not covered under new Will of 1992. 2. My grandfather had no income or made properties in his lifetime and all properties were self acquired properties of my father But one of my sister claiming that it is a not self acquired property of my father but it is joint family proteins and if that is the case, how to prove it is self acquired property or joint family property. 3. In our case new "Will" of 1992 made invalid previous "Will" of 1980 even though properties covered were different.
1. To give correct option, your parents' date of death is essential.
2. Latest WILL of 1992 supercedes the previous WILL of 1980.
3. To prove that it's self acquired property of your father, his source of income and the bank details could be helpful.
It is necessary to peruse both wills to advise
2) generally last will supersedes earlier will
3)there must be residuary clause in last will
4) father has to file declaratory suit that he is absolute owner of properties as full consideration paid by him
5) enclose bank statements to prove source of funds for purchase of properties
The Will of 1992 will not supersede the Will of 1980, as it applies only to the two properties specified in it. To demonstrate that the properties are self-acquired and not part of the joint family estate, the party must produce evidence such as title deeds, property tax receipts and other documents that show the provenance of the properties.
To answer to all your questions:
WILL comes into effect only after the lifetime of the testator i.e the person who writes the will. In your case, after your father's life time.
Till your father's lifetime, the Will is ineffective, hence any action taken on the properties bequthed would have no effect.
The last WILL supercedes any other will written earlier.
You and your brother and sisters, can file a partition suit for the properties not covered by the last will.
1. Both Wills are legally valid if they cover different properties without any overlapping.
2. It has to be proved how your father acquired the property, by producing receipts for payments made, bank records, recitals in sale deeds etc.
3. See reply to Q. 1.
- Under Section 224 of the Succession Act, a Person can appoint different executors for different parts of his properties.
- Further, it is permissible for a person to make two or more distinct wills or Codicils for different parts of his property, and it is also permissible for him to appoint different executors for different properties under the different Wills or Codicils.
1. Since , the second Will is for the property which was not mentioned in the first Will , then the provision of Last Will not applied here .
2. Since, the properties are in the name of your father , then it cannot be considered as ancestral property or property of joint family fund.
3. Both the Wills are valid , and your sister cannot claim any right over the First Will.
1. There's no mention about the previous in the subsequent Will.
Also the property bequeathed in the previous Will do not appear in the subsequent Will.
The previous Will was not canceled through the subsequent Will.
The property bequeathed in the subsequent Will is totally different property and the beneficiaries are also different even though the testator is the same person in both the Wills.
Therefore both the Wills may be considered as legally valid.
2. You don't have to prove that, the burden is on her to prove that the said properties are joint family property.
Since your father had sufficient source of income to purchase them, you can rely upon the said circumstances or documents to establish your claim.
3. Read the first answer above.
Dear client,
Whether or not the previous will of 1980 becomes invalid depends on the language used in the 1992 will. If the 1992 will specifically revokes or supersedes the 1980 will, then the 1980 will may be considered invalid. However, if the 1992 will does not mention the 1980 will or the properties covered by it, the 1980 will may still be valid with respect to the properties covered by it. The exact interpretation of the two wills will depend on the specific language used in each document and the laws of the jurisdiction where the properties are located.
The question of whether the properties are self-acquired or joint family properties will depend on the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the acquisition and ownership of the properties. In general, if the properties were acquired through the efforts or earnings of one person, such as your father in this case, they would be considered self-acquired properties. However, if the properties were acquired through the joint efforts of multiple family members, they may be considered joint family properties. You may need to provide evidence of the source of funds used to purchase or maintain the properties, as well as the intent and actions of the family members involved, to determine whether the properties are self-acquired or joint family properties.
The validity of the 1992 will and its effect on the 1980 will will depend on the specific language used in each document and the laws of the jurisdiction where the properties are located. If the 1992 will revokes or supersedes the 1980 will, the 1992 will may be considered the valid will with respect to all the properties. Again, the exact interpretation of the two wills will depend on the specific language used in each document and the laws of the jurisdiction where the properties are located.
The validity of the 1980 Will and its provisions for the eight properties covered by it would not be affected by the 1992 Will, which only covered the two properties left out of the previous Will. The 1992 Will would only govern the distribution of the two properties it covered. Therefore, the previous Will of 1980 would remain valid and the distribution of the eight properties covered by it would be governed by its provisions.
The legal status of a property as self-acquired or joint family property would depend on the facts and circumstances surrounding its acquisition and ownership. If your father acquired the properties with his own resources and without any contribution or help from your grandfather or other family members, then they would be considered his self-acquired properties. However, if the properties were acquired with the help or contribution of other family members or were inherited from your grandfather or other ancestors, they could be considered joint family properties. To prove that a property is self-acquired, you may need to provide evidence such as purchase receipts, bank statements, and other documents that show the source of funds used to acquire the property.
The 1992 Will would only govern the distribution of the two properties it covered and would not necessarily invalidate the previous Will of 1980. However, it is possible that the 1992 Will contained a clause revoking the previous Will. If the revocation clause in the 1992 Will is valid, then the previous Will would be considered invalid, and the distribution of the properties would be governed solely by the provisions of the 1992 Will. The validity of the revocation clause would depend on the specific language used in the 1992 Will and the circumstances under which it was made.
No if both the will has different properties and the last will was not considered as a one and only one will be. Testator then both wills.
