Mosammat Shapna Khatun v Shamim Hasan & Anor

Mosammat Shapna Khatun v Shamim Hasan & Anor

The defendants failed to discharge the burden of proof to establish the authenticity of the disputed will due to unexplained absence of corroborative evidence, inconsistencies, and anomalies, including reference to assets in Pakistan, and the only independent expert evidence supported the proposition that the signature was not Mr Shaikh's.

Parties
Claimant: Mrs Mosammat Shapna Khatun; Defendant: Mr Shamim Hasan; Defendant: Mr Rajesh Kumar Singh Pathania
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Probate Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Defendants failed to prove the disputed will; judgment for claimant.
Legal Topics
Will Validity, Forgery, Burden of Proof, Expert Evidence, Procedural Compliance
Probate Property Civil Procedure Will Validity Forgery Burden of Proof Expert Evidence Procedural Compliance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Mosammat Shapna Khatun

Claimant

Mr Shamim Hasan

Defendant

Mr Rajesh Kumar Singh Pathania

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disputed will dated 19 September 2019 was genuine or a forgery
  2. 2 Whether the defendants discharged the burden of proof to establish the will's authenticity
  3. 3 Whether procedural irregularities affected the outcome

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants failed to discharge the burden of proof to establish the authenticity of the disputed will due to unexplained absence of corroborative evidence, inconsistencies, and anomalies, including reference to assets in Pakistan, and the only independent expert evidence supported the proposition that the signature was not Mr Shaikh's.

Court Disposition

Defendants failed to prove the disputed will; judgment for claimant.

Orders

  • Further hearing required to address consequential matters including probate conduct and costs.
  • Written submissions to be filed 48 hours prior to hearing.