A mother, in the ordinary course of events, is not likely to exclude her only son from her will, Bombay High Court has said in a case pertaining to the validity of the legal document.
The will, made in favour of daughter, could not be proven because it was "unnatural" the High Court held in a recent ruling.
At the same time, the court refused to validate another will, in son's favour, because he could not produce the witnesses who had attested it.
Prithviraj Patel and Meena Patel's mother passed away in July 1990. Upon the death, two wills were found.
First will was made on May 24, 1989, when UK-based Meena was visiting her mother. This will completely excluded Prithviraj from inheritance on the ground that he had mismanaged his father's properties. By this will, daughter got all the property.
The second will was produced by the son, which gave him mother's flat in upscale South Mumbai locality, among other things. This will bore the date March 9, 1990.
The siblings challenged wills produced by each other.
Justice Roshan Dalvi, in the ruling last week, held that the 1990 will in son's favour would prevail if proved. But court recorded that the son could not produce any of the two witnesses who had attested the witnesses; so the same could not be proved.
On the other hand, the daughter's will, made in an attorney's office, too was suspicious because "it is impossible to conceive that the mother disinherited her only son as well as her grandchildren from will".