Forged Will Claim Over Parsi Heiress’ ₹250-Crore Bungalow Dismissed: Bombay High Court Orders Inquiry into Possible Leak of Testamentary Papers

Background of the Case: Dispute Over the Estate of Hilla Dadysett

The Bombay High Court dismissed a caveat filed by Khushroo Behramshaw Mogal, who claimed inheritance rights over the property of late Hilla Dadysett, the last surviving member of an eminent Parsi family in Mumbai.

Dadysett passed away on 22 May 2023, leaving behind a will bequeathing her share in her Kemp’s Corner bungalow, Monte Rosa, valued around ₹250 crore, to charity.

Her executors, Hoshang and Rashna Khan, filed a testamentary petition seeking probate of her will and codicils before the High Court.

While the probate petition was pending, Mogal filed a caveat, claiming that he was “like a son” to the deceased and relied on an alleged later will dated 23 March 2023, which he asserted superseded all previous instruments.

---

Allegation of Forged Will and Possible Data Leak

The Court noted serious suspicion that Mogal may have gained unauthorized access to confidential documents filed in the pending probate petition.

Justice Milind Jadhav observed that:

• The alleged will relied upon by Mogal appeared to have been fabricated

• The material in the forged document seemed to be taken directly from the probate petition

• The will did not exist at the time of the deceased’s death

The Court had earlier directed filing of a criminal complaint against Mogal for:

• falsifying evidence

• forgery

• offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and corresponding IPC provisions

The Court has now also ordered an internal inquiry to determine:

• how Mogal accessed sealed testamentary records

• whether any staff of the Testamentary Department colluded in supplying documents

• whether systemic safeguards require strengthening

The Prothonotary and Senior Master have been directed to conduct the inquiry.

---

Competing Testamentary Instruments: Will and Codicils

The Court noted that:

• Dadysett executed a will dated 18 December 2015

• Four codicils were executed thereafter

• The last codicil was dated 27 February 2023

Mogal, however, produced a purported will dated 23 March 2023, claiming it was the “last will” and therefore legally binding under the Indian Succession Act.

The Court held that:

• the alleged March 2023 will was fabricated

• it was created by misusing information from the probate records

• it did not exist during the lifetime of the testator

Accordingly, the caveat was dismissed.

---

Court’s Observation on Fabrication of Will

The Court recorded that:

“It is clearly discernible that the alleged will propounded by the caveator did not exist at the time of the death of the deceased, and the conduct of the caveator strongly suggests fabrication using materials from the testamentary petition.”

The Court emphasized the need to ensure that:

• probate records do not fall into wrong hands

• testamentary proceedings remain confidential

• internal court mechanisms prevent misuse

---

Key Terms Under the Indian Succession Act Relevant to the Case

Meaning of “Will” – Section 2(h)

A will is:

“the legal declaration of the intention of a testator with respect to his property which he desires to be carried into effect after his death.”

---

Execution of Will – Section 63

A valid will must:

• be signed by the testator

• be attested by at least two witnesses

• each witness must have seen the testator sign

Failure to comply renders it invalid.

---

Codicil – Section 2(b)

A codicil is:

a document that explains, alters, or adds to a previously executed will and is deemed part of the will.

Codicils do not revoke the will unless expressly stated.

---

Last Will Prevailing – Principle under Succession Law

The latest valid will supersedes prior wills and codicils — however, only if:

• it is proven to be genuine

• duly executed and attested

• made voluntarily

• free from coercion and fraud

A forged last will does not supersede prior valid instruments.

---

Probate Proceedings – Sections 213, 222, 276

• Probate is compulsory for Parsis and Christians in Bombay, Madras, and Calcutta jurisdictions

• It grants judicial recognition of a will

• Executors must apply before distribution of estate

---

Caveat in Testamentary Matters

A caveat allows an opposing party to:

• challenge the grant of probate

• dispute validity of will

• require notice before any order is passed

However, a caveat based on forged documents is liable to be dismissed.

---

Applicable Statutes in This Case

Indian Succession Act, 1925

Relevant provisions include:

• Section 2(b) – Codicil

• Section 2(h) – Will

• Section 63 – Execution of Will

• Section 70 – Revocation of Will

• Section 213 – Probate requirement

• Section 276 – Application for probate

• Section 301 – Powers of Court over executors

---

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita / IPC (Forgery & False Evidence)

Provisions likely applicable:

• Forgery of valuable security / will

• Fabrication of false evidence

• Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property

---

Constitutional Framework

• Article 227 – Supervisory jurisdiction of High Courts

• Judicial duty to protect integrity of court records

• Obligation to prevent abuse of court process

---

Leading Judicial Precedents on Proof of Wills

H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma (1959)

Landmark judgment on:

• burden of proof in wills

• suspicious circumstances

• duty of propounder to remove doubts

---

Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur (1977)

Court must scrutinize:

• unnatural execution circumstances

• absence of genuine attestation

• questionable late-stage wills

---

Rani Purnima Debi v. Kumar Khagendra Narayan Deb (1962)

Suspicious wills require:

• higher standard of proof

• credible attesting witnesses

---

Conclusion — A Strong Judicial Step to Protect Probate Integrity

The Bombay High Court ruling:

• rejects fraudulent inheritance claims

• protects the sanctity of probate proceedings

• directs systemic inquiry into internal data leaks

• reinforces stringent scrutiny of suspicious wills

• upholds testamentary intent and charitable bequests

The case underscores that:

forged wills cannot override validly executed testamentary instruments, and courts will not permit abuse of probate records for unlawful financial gain.

---