What was the main legal question in Dhannulal v. Ganesh Ram?

Whether the disputed Will was legally executed and valid in light of surrounding suspicious circumstances and the parties’ relationship.

How does the presumption of marriage apply?

Long cohabitation raises a strong presumption of a valid marriage and legitimacy of children, unless rebutted by unimpeachable evidence.

What level of proof is required for a Will?

Proof of a Will is stricter than other documents. Execution must show intelligent understanding and acceptance of contents, not mere signatures or thumbmarks.

Why was the Will viewed with suspicion here?

Beneficiaries collected the thumb impression; the alleged scribe was not the actual writer; and the testatrix’s earlier pleading said nothing about any Will.

What happened to the sale based on the Will?

Since the Will was not proved free of suspicion, subsequent transfers based on it could not defeat the plaintiff’s claim to the property.

Dhannulal v. Ganesh Ram

Dhannulal v. Ganesh Ram (AIR 2015 SC 2382)

Supreme Court of India 2015 AIR 2015 SC 2382 Succession & Evidence Reading: 7 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi | Location: India | Published: 31 Oct 2025

Primary: Validity of Will; Presumption of Marriage; Legitimacy; Suspicious Circumstances | Secondary: Execution of Will; Scribe; Thumb Impression; Transfer Based on Will

Quick Summary

The dispute is about a Will and the title to family property. The plaintiff (grandson) said the Will made by Phoolbasa Bai in favour of her nephews was not genuine. He also attacked a later sale based on that Will.

The Supreme Court said two things: (1) long cohabitation raises a strong presumption of a valid marriage and legitimacy; and (2) a Will needs strict proof. Here, several suspicious facts surrounded the Will. It was not proved to be valid beyond doubt.

Issues

Was the disputed Will legally executed and valid?

Rules

Presumption of marriage: Long, continuous cohabitation → presumption of valid marriage and legitimacy, unless rebutted by unimpeachable evidence.
Proof of Will (higher standard): Execution means intelligent understanding and acceptance of contents, not mere signature or thumbmark.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline illustration for Dhannulal v. Ganesh Ram

Family: Shivram owned the suit property. He had two children—Sumitrabai and Chhatrapati.

Suit filed: Plaintiff (grandson of Sumitrabai) seeks declaration of ownership, possession, and damages.

Disputed Will (18-08-1977): Alleged Will by Phoolbasa Bai (said to be Chhatrapati’s mistress) in favour of her brother’s sons (D1–D4).

Sale deed (1987): Phoolbasa also sells part of the property to D5 based on the alleged Will.

Challenge: Plaintiff contests both the Will and the sale as invalid.

Arguments

Appellant (Plaintiff)

The Will has serious suspicions (thumb impression managed by beneficiaries; false scribe claim).
The alleged testatrix earlier filed a pleading but never mentioned any Will.
Sale based on such Will cannot defeat the family’s title.

Respondents (Defendants)

Phoolbasa lived with Chhatrapati; their relationship is recognized by all concerned.
The Will was duly executed; transfers made on its basis are valid.

Judgment

Presumption upheld: Long cohabitation supports the presumption of marriage and legitimacy.
Will not proved: Multiple suspicious circumstances (beneficiaries managing thumb impression; claimed scribe not actual writer; silence about Will in prior pleading).
Effect: Without clearing suspicion, the Will cannot stand; a sale resting on it also fails against the plaintiff.

Ratio

Two tracks: (1) Cohabitation → presumption of valid marriage and legitimacy; (2) Wills require heightened proof. If suspicious facts are not dispelled, the Will fails and cannot pass title.

Why It Matters

Evidence guide: Shows what “suspicious circumstances” look like in probate disputes.
Family law link: Presumption protects status and children from stigma.
Title safety: Buyers must verify the proof behind a Will before relying on it.

Key Takeaways

Strong Presumption

Long cohabitation → valid marriage & legitimacy.

Will = Higher Proof

Mere signature/thumbmark is not enough.

Clear Suspicion

Beneficiaries’ role and false scribe are red flags.

Pleading Silence

If a Will exists, prior pleadings should mention it.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “Live Long, Prove Strong.”

Live Long: Long cohabitation → presumption of valid marriage.
Prove: A Will needs strict, clear proof of understanding and consent.
Strong: Clear every suspicion; otherwise the Will collapses.

IRAC

Issue: Was the Will validly executed and proved despite suspicious circumstances?

Rule: Strong presumption of marriage from cohabitation; Wills need higher proof showing intelligent execution and acceptance.

Application: Beneficiaries managed thumb impression; claimed scribe not true; testatrix’s pleading silent about Will → suspicion not cleared.

Conclusion: Will not proved; transfer based on it cannot defeat the plaintiff’s claim.

Glossary

Presumption of Marriage: Law favours marriage over concubinage when partners cohabit for long.
Suspicious Circumstances: Facts that cast doubt on a Will (e.g., beneficiary involvement, inconsistent scribe).
Execution of Will: Understanding contents and signing to accept them, not just a mechanical act.

FAQs

It creates a strong presumption, but it can be defeated by clear, unimpeachable evidence to the contrary.

The propounder must show that the testator understood the document and accepted it, and also remove any suspicious circumstances.

No. A buyer relying on an unproved Will cannot get a better title than the Will conveys.

Case Meta

CASE_TITLE: Dhannulal v. Ganesh Ram
PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Validity of Will; Presumption of Marriage; Legitimacy; Suspicious Circumstances
SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: Execution of Will; Scribe; Thumb Impression; Transfer Based on Will
PUBLISH_DATE: 31 Oct 2025
AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi
LOCATION: India