SynopsisThe Supreme Court ruled that a handwriting expert's opinion is unnecessary when a daughter challenges the entirety of her father's Will, not just his signature. The court overturned a Kerala High Court decision that had ordered a handwriting test, emphasizing that the dispute centered on the testator's free will and consent, not the authenticity of his signature.Listen to this article in summarized format ListenET OnlineNo handwriting expert’s opinion is needed for late father’s Will as daughter challenged the entire Will itself, rules Supreme Court (AI generated representative image)On January 27, 2026, the Supreme Court of India held that a handwriting expert’s opinion is not needed for checking a Will, if the signature is not in dispute. This judgement came in the light of a case filed by a daughter who said that her father did not execute the Will with his free will and consent. However, she did not specifically dispute her father’s signatures on the said Will.Income Tax GuideIncome Tax Union Budget FY 2026-27 LiveIncome Tax Slabs FY 2025-26Income Tax Calculator 2025She filed this case in Supreme Court to challenge a Kerala High Court ruling (O.P. (C) No. 1676/2022) that set aside the order of the trial court and directed that the Will in question be sent to a handwriting expert to assess the authenticity of the testator’s signature(s).She drew the attention of the Supreme Court to her plaint filed (O.S. No. 258/2020) wherein, in paragraph 4, she stated as follows:- “The plaintiff’s father E.J. Thomas did not execute or create any such document as one bearing No. 89/3/2008 on the file of the S.R.O., Maradu with his free will and consent.”The Supreme Court said that based on the earlier statement in the complaint, the focus is solely on testator’s free will and consent, not on his signature(s), as such.Her lawyer told the court that while her father’s signature(s) in the aforestated Will is not contested, the Will still needs to be validated according to Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.Also read: Witnesses to a Will turn hostile? How Hindu succession is decided then SC Judgement: The impugned order/judgment passed by the High Court was set aside and the appeal allowed, leaving it open to the parties to agitate all other issues before the trial court. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.Also read: Think twice before picking a Will writer: How close relationships can complicate probateWhat was in the Kerala High Court judgement which Supreme Court overturned?In the Kerala High Court case no. OP(C) NO. 1676 OF 2022 the trial court’s order was under challenge. The trial court was deciding a case for partition of family property and herein the defendants 2 and 3 asked the court to send the disputed registered Will for expert opinion. The trial court had ultimately rejected the application.Also read: More than 30-year-old Will fails in High Court: Why brothers lost claim to ancestral landThe Kerala High Court had said that the trial court rejected the application without knowing the mandate and the liability imposed on the propounder to prove the Will.Also read: Son challenges late father’s Will giving property to aunt and late grandmother; wins case in HC as court allows Will forgery probe to continue The Kerala High Court had said that the Will has to be proved in accordance with the mandate under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925:“63. Execution of unprivileged Wills. —Every testator, not being a soldier employed in an expedition or engaged in actual warfare,12 [or an airman so employed or engaged,] or a mariner at sea, shall execute his Will according to the following rules:— (b) The signature or mark of the testator, or the signature of the person signing for him, shall be so placed that it shall appear that it was intended thereby to give effect to the writing as a Will.(c) The Will shall be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom has seen the testator sign or affix his mark to the Will or has seen some other person sign the Will, in the presence and by the direction of the testator, or has received from the testator a personal acknowledgement of his signature or mark, or the signature of such other person; and each of the witnesses shall sign the Will in the presence of the testator, but it shall not be necessary that more than one witness be present at the same time, and no particular form of attestation shall be necessary.”The Kerala High Court had said that a Will has to be proved in compliance with the requirement under Section 68 of the evidence Act. The Kerala High Court had said: “Necessarily, it is the duty of the propounder to show and establish its due execution. The denial of right to adduce evidence or to obtain expert opinion hence is so fatal to the case advanced by the defendants.” The Kerala High Court also said that the trial court has utterly failed in exercising the jurisdiction in