Father can exclude son from will: SC

18 Oct 2007 THE TIMES OF INDIA

NEW DELHI: Callous offspring who do not care for aging or ill parents but still expect to be given a share of their parents' property had better pay heed. The Supreme Court found nothing suspicious in a father cutting out of his will a son who had refused to look after his cancer-afflicted parent.

The son lived separately and had hardly inquired about the health of his father for 19 years.

Sankaran Nair, a cancer patient, lost his job in 1959 but got no succour from his son, Madhavan Nair. For the next 19 years, the son lived separately. During these trying times, the son and daughter of Sankaran's sister took care of him.

However, immediately after his father's death in 1978, the avaricious son moved a Kerala civil court demanding rights over Sankaran's property claiming to be the natural heir.

What came in his way was a will executed by Sankaran in 1971 giving the entire property to his nephew and niece, probably in gratitude for the care they took of him when his own son was found wanting.

The trial court found this utterly suspicious, that a father would deprive his son of his rights over the paternal property and ruled in favour of Madhavan. On appeal, the Kerala HC set aside the trial court order and restored the property to Sankaran's nephew and niece.

When the matter reached SC and the 'suspicion' ground was raised, perhaps implying that Sankaran had been influenced by his niece and nephew, a Bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and H S Bedi rejected the plea and said, "Deprivation of a due share to the natural heirs itself is not a factor which would lead to the conclusion that there exists suspicious circumstances."

The Bench noted that Sankaran, during the period of his long ailment, lived with his sister and her children. "If in that situation, he executed a will in their favour, no exception thereto can be taken," it said.

The fact that the will was executed in 1971, seven years before Sankaran's death, did not escape the apex court's scrutiny. It said: "The testator (Sankaran) lived for seven years after the execution of the will. He could have changed his mind — but he did not. The very fact that he did not take any step for cancellation of the will is itself a factor which the court may take into consideration for the purpose of upholding the same."

Reflecting on the attitude of the son to justify the correctness of the will, the Bench said, "The son was not meeting the father. He had not been attending to him. He was not even meeting the expenses for his treatment from 1959, when he lost his job, till his death in 1978."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Father_can_exclude_son_from_will_SC/articleshow/2468705.cms

With Thanks from THE TIMES OF INDIA

For any query:-
deepakmiglani@hotmail.com