Persons of Unsound Mind

U/s. 59 of ISA tADVgja ldbukAV.Fqf;vhe existence of a sound mind is a sine quo non for the validity of the
Will. Most of the Wills are not made by young persons who are fully fit but are made by persons who are
aged and bed ridden Hence, law does not expect that the testator shoukakbfjajcbasjkjc a.cjbasu.kca sscld be
in a perfect state of health , or that he should be able to agasbc,k ascbacfqadgive complicated instructions as
to how his property was to be distributed. A sound disposing mind implies sufficient capacity to deal with
and understand the disposition of property in his Will -
1) the testator must understand augdbkasjccblukasbc açbilassthat he is giving away his property to one or
more objects
2) he must understand and recollect the extent of his property 3) he must also understand the persons and the
extent of claims included as well as thydyujbams s,slkasose who are excluded from the Will. In Swifen v.
Swifen it was held that the testator must retain a degree of understanding to comprehend what he is doing,
and have a volition or power of choice.
Minors: A minor who has not completed the age of 18 years is not capable of making Wills. The onus of
proof on determining whether the person was a minor at the time of making a Will is on the person who has
relied upon the Will. S.12 of the Indian Contract Act also ajbkasjcasprovides that a minor is incompetent to
contract.
Other Persons Incapable Of Making A Will
Explanation I to S.59 of ISA provides that a Hindu marvascbjasjc.jaskc,ried woman is capable of disposing
by Will only that property which she caadsyyajg,cbaslkjaliuukd bau bcn alienate during her lifetime. Expla-
nation II provides that the persons who are deaf, dumb or blind can prepare a Will if they are able to prove
that they were aware of what they were doing. Explanation III provides for persons who are mentally ill an-
dukaduilascb,abcjck.jasdj insane. However subsequent insanity does not make the Will invalid i.e. if a per -
son makes a Will while he is of sound mind and then subsequently becomes insane the Will is valid and is
not rendered invalid by subsequent insanity. Further a person of unsound mind can make a Will during his
lucid interval. A Will made by a person who is intoxicated or is suffering from any other illness, which ren -
ders him incapable of knowing what he is doing, is invalid.jfgab.dkn,ans.kc.kas
Though the burden of proof to prove that the Will was made out of free volition is on the person who pro-
pounds the Will , a Will that has been proved to be duly signed and attested Will be presumed to have been
made by a person of sound mind, unless proved otherwise. Further, a bequest can be made to an infant, an id-
iot, a lunatic or other disqualified person as it is not necessary that the legatee should be capable of assenting
it.

Revocability jbA DAIBUKVHL DIA\CIHHDQ, Cdil HIUDLKUILVQdvof Will

S.62 of the Indian Succession Act deals with the characteristic of a Will being revocable or altered anytime
during the lifetime of the testator. S. 70 of ISA provides the manner in which it can be revoked
A mere intention to revoke is not an effective revocation. The revocation of the Will should be in writing and
an express revocation clause would revoke all the prior Wills aauydsgjbask,cm ,ascnd codicils. If there is no
express clause to the effect then the former Will would become invalid to the extent of its inconsistency with
the latest Will, this is known as an implied q KVUBLIHQQ.LFHVBUYAKWKFHLIAWEFLHGOQLKIH-
VAUWLEKI.LHevocation (however it should be shown that the differences are irreconcilable). However if
there is no inconsistency between the Wills then they cannot be considered as two separate Wills but the two
must be read together to indicate the testamentary intention of the testator.
Revocation can also be made in writing through declaring VQGVB Q,,udb livqU,K, HVLIUQkfh klQg an
intention to revoke and the writing must be signed by the testator and attested by two witnesses. The deed of
revocation has to be executed in the same way as the Will itself.
The Will maybe burnt or torn by the testator or by some other person in his presence and by his direction
with the intention of revoking the same. The burning of the Will must be actual and not symbolic. The burn-
ing must destroy the Will atleast to the extent of his entirety. Further the Will need not be torn into pieces. It
would be sufficient if it is slightly torn with the intent of revocation.
The Will can be revoked expressly by another WiDq vlikdub,kak vblWAKF.AIBOI;AFEI ll or codicil, by
implied revocation, by some writing, by burning or tearing or by destroying otherwise. Cancellation of a Will
by drawing lines across it is not a mode of revocation. Under the Hindu Law the Will is not revoked by mar -
riage or by subsequent birth