In one recent Writ Petition facts being Mr. Duragappa Basalingappa Bhavi married to Smt. Tayawwa. Mr. D executed his alleged Will dated 2.11.2016 which was registered with the sub-registrar's office. The alleged will of Mr. D was challenged by Smt. T through a suit under O. S No. 342 of 2017.

Smt. T expired during the pendency of the said suit. Thereafter, an application was filled by one Mr. Yallappa Kempanna Badiagawad who was the son of the brother of Smt. T, to come on record as the legal representative of Smt. T, claiming that a Will has been executed by Smt. T in his favour, bequeathing the properties that are the subject matter of the said suit. The application was opposed by the Petitioners therein, contending that the Will has not been executed in a proper manner and that the Will would have to be proved before the application could be considered. The Petitioners also contended that they had been looking after Smt. T and there is no reason for Smt. T to execute the Will in favour of the applicant.

The Counsel for the Respondent submitted that Smt. T in her lifetime filed an amendment application in the present suit wherein Smt. T. has categorically admitted the execution of the said Will in favour of the Applicant. Since this statement is part of the pleadings filed by Smt. T, there would be no requirement for any further proof of the Will. Such proof would be required only if they were to say there is no categorical admission by the testator as regards the execution of the Will.

In the present case the Court observed that "once a Testator has admitted the execution of a Will in a proceedings before the Court and pleadings are filed, I am of the considered opinion that there would be no requirement to further establish the

authenticity of the Will in terms of Sections 67, 68 and 70 of the BSA, 2023. Since the Testator herself has categorically admitted the execution, veracity and the contents of the Will and has herself produced the Will in the said suit."