{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f36\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}
{\f37\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f39\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f40\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f41\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}
{\f42\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f43\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f44\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;
\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;
\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\qj \fi720\li144\ri144\sl576\slmult0
\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin144\lin144\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 Style 4;}{\s16\qj \fi720\li144\ri0\sl552\slmult0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin144\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 Style 1;}{\s17\ql \fi144\li0\ri144\sa792\sl444\slmult0\widctlpar\tx1296\faauto\adjustright\rin144\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
\sbasedon0 \snext17 Style 8;}{\s18\ql \fi720\li144\ri0\sl480\slmult1\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin144\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext18 Style 7;}{\s19\ql \li0\ri0\sa720\sl480\slmult0
\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext19 Style 6;}{\s20\qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
\sbasedon0 \snext20 Style 5;}{\s21\qj \fi144\li0\ri0\sa648\sl528\slmult0\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext21 Style 2;}{\s22\ql \fi864\li0\ri0\sa792\sl480\slmult1
\widctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext22 Style 3;}{\*\cs23 \additive \ul\cf2 \sbasedon10 \styrsid459557 Hyperlink;}}{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}
{\*\rsidtbl \rsid459557\rsid753432\rsid3296418\rsid4598501\rsid6179520\rsid6638795\rsid9583599\rsid11030461\rsid11301267\rsid12729954\rsid13656591\rsid14055667\rsid15490767}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\author sam_f}
{\operator hamilton_l}{\creatim\yr2012\mo1\dy6\hr10\min58}{\revtim\yr2012\mo2\dy17\hr15\min25}{\version9}{\edmins64}{\nofpages7}{\nofwords2500}{\nofchars14253}{\*\company scims}{\nofcharsws16720}{\vern24689}}
\paperw11904\paperh16838\margl1871\margr1387\margt1007\margb3853 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0
\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale150\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot3296418 \fet0\sectd \linex0\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang 
{\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang 
{\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain 
\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 IN THE }{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 SUPREME COURT}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 , FIJI ISLANDS}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 
\par AT}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501  }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 SUVA
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid11301267 CIVIL APPEAL NO. CBV0003 OF 1998S
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. ABU0052 of 1996)
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 BETWEEN:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 SASHI PRASAD SHARMA
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Appellant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 AND:
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 DAVENDRA PRASAD SHARMA
\par RANJULA DEVI SHARMA
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Respondents
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Coram:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  Hon. Justice John von Doussa \endash  Judge of Supreme Court
\par Hon. Justice Sir Kenneth Keith \endash  Judge of Supreme Court
\par Hon. Justice Robert French \endash  Judge of Supreme Court
\par 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Hearing:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  Wednesday 9}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 th}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  April, 2003, Suva
\par 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Counsel:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  Appellant in Person
\par Mr. G.P. Lala for the Respondents
\par 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 Date of Judgment:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  Friday 11}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\super\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 th}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  April, 2003}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal given at Suva on 27 February 1998 which dismissed the Appellant's a}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15490767 
ppeal from a decision }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 of the High Court, Pathik J., 
given on 30 August 1996. The High Court had ordered the removal of a caveat lodged by the Appellant against the grant of probate of the last will of the Appellant's late father, Ambi}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11301267 k}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 a Prasad Sharma (the deceased), to the Respondents who are the executors named in the last will. The Respondents are respectively the brother and sister of the Appellant.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The Appellant seeks to bring this appeal as of right pursuant to the provisions}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 of the Supreme Court Decree 1991.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
Section 8(1)(b) of that Decree provides that an}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 appeal shall lie from a decision of the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court from fin
}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11301267 al}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  decisions in any civil proceedings where the matter in dispute is of the value of}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 $20,000.00 or upwards or where the appeal involves, directly or indirectly, a claim}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
to or a question respecting property or a right of the value of $20,000.00 or upwards. The Respondent has not challenged the competency of the appeal. The papers before the Court indicate that the value of the estate of the deceased exceeds}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 $20,000.00. In these circumstances we treat the appeal as properly instituted}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 before this Court.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 B}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
y way of brief history to the proceedings, the deceased died on 8 February 1992 at the Colonial Memorial Hospital. Shortly before his admission to the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 hospital he suffer
ed serious injuries, apparently in a fall at his home. On 30 September 1992 the Respondents applied to the High Court for a grant of probate. On 28 October 1992 the Appellant lodged a caveat No. 33 of 1992 to prohibit the grant of probate being processed.
 
There was hostility between the parties to these proceedings even before the deceased's death. After his death the Appellant asserted that the Respondents (and other family members) had been complicit in the happening of the deceased's death, and that his
 will was invalid on account of the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
Respondent's fraud, and undue influence and duress. The testamentary capacity of the deceased was also raised as an issue.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 That caveat was warned by the Respondents on 3 Nove}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 mber 1992 and the warning was du}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ly served on the Appellant.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Consi}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 derable delay then occurred wh}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
ilst an inquest inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of the deceased was held.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 A ruling on that}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 inquest was given by the Resident Magistrate, Mr S.M. Shah in March 1995.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 findings of the Magistrate stated that "there is no evidence}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  wh}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 atsoever of any foul}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  play" }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 and concluded by stating that the deceased's "death was due to multiple injuries consistent with a fall". The Respondents then applied by summons to have the caveat removed. The matt
er came on for hearing before Fatiaki J. on 7 July}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
1995. There was no appearance of the Appellant, and Fatiaki J. ordered the removal of the caveat and that probate be granted in favour of the Respondents.
\par 
\par On 7 July 1995, after the order was made by Fatiaki J., the Appellant lodged another caveat against the grant of probate in identical terms to the first caveat. The Appellant later asserted that he was in the precincts of the court at the time that}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  Fatiaki}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  J. made his order, but he was not formally called. In these}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
 circumstances the Appellant cou}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ld have, and should have, applied to set aside the order of 7 July 1995 pursuant to }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 O}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 14 r11 of the High Court Rules, 1988 (as amended). Instead of doing so, the Appellant sought to r
emedy his situation by lodging the second caveat. No point is taken that the second caveat is invalid. In the light of our conclusions as to the merits of the grounds of appeal now raised by the Appellant it is unnecessary for us to consider whether the s
econd caveat had validity.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Without challenging the val}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 idity of the second caveat, the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 Respondents simply applied to have it removed. The application was heard by Pathik J., and on 30 August 1996 he ordered that the caveat be removed forthwith. The Appellan
t unsuccessfully appealed against that decision to the Court of Appeal, and now appeals to this Court.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The Appellant's grounds of appeal are not easy to follow}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 .}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 Errors are alleged on behalf of both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal. As we understand the grounds of appeal, the complaints made can be broadly summar}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 ised in the following way. Firs}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 t it is contended that the Court of Appeal erred in not finding that the Appellant had made out a case that the Respondents by entering into terms of settlement
 with Dr Arun Prasad Sharma (one of the Appellant's brothers who was a party represented at the inquest) caused the inquest to be prematurely closed.
\par 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid753432 This i}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 s an}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 aspect of a wider complaint made before Pathik J. that the caveat should not be removed until 
the inquest into the deceased's death had been reopened. Secondly it is alleged that the Court of Appeal ought to have held that the trial judge erred in not finding against the validity of the will on the grounds of fraud, undue influence and testamentar
y incapacity. It is alleged that these errors are the result either of the wrongful rejection of evidence on those issues, or a failure to properly consider the evidence, by the trial judg}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
e. In the hearing before Pathik}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  J. the only issue was whether the caveat should be removed. The validity of}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
 the will was not before Pathik}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  J., although evidence showing that there was an arguable case of invalidity would have provided a rea}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
son for not removing the caveat.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 In oral arguments before this Court, the Appellant did not elaborate on his}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 written submissions or grounds of appeal, but urged this Court to order that the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 inquest be reopened. As the Court endeavoured to explain to the Appellant; the only issue raised by the appeal is whether the Courts below fell into error in}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ordering the removal of the caveat.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 In these proceedings this Court has no power to consider, or make any order about, the cond}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 u}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ct of the inquest.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
In our consideration and disposal of the appeal we propose to deal with the issues raised in the grounds of appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The grounds of appeal seek to canvass issues of fact that were not argued before the Court of Appeal.
\par 
\par The affidavit material which the Appellant by his grounds of appeal now}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
seeks to rely on before this Court was before Pathik J. Pathik J. correctly treated the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
application before him as one made under s.47 of the Succession, Probate and}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
Administration Act (Cap 60) which gives the Court a general discretion to remove a}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 caveat after }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 d}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ue noti}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 ce to the caveator. See }{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 Ros}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 y}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501  Reddy f/n Arjun Prasad}{
\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501  v}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501  }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 Manchama Webb and Lawrence Webb,}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  Civil Appeal 14/94, Court of Appeal}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  decision 11}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  November 1994.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 His Lordship, after re}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 citing the history of the matter }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 and referring to s}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid753432 .47}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  said:
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 "}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 For the purp}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 oses of the issue before me, the only ground }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 which }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 the}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501  }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 
defendant gives for not ordering the caveat to be removed is that the Plaintiffs should wait "until the inquest is re-opened, proper eviden}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 ce collected and judgment made".}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid4598501 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 On the evidence before me, }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501 I}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501  do not consider this to }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14055667 b}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 e a good enough reason for grant of Probate purposes to let the caveat remain. There is also no indication when, if ever, the inquest will }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14055667 b}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 e re-opened.}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid4598501  }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 The inquest matter was also before his Lordship and he must have considered it before }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14055667 h}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid4598501 e made the said Orders."
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid14055667 Plai}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 nly, at the time of the hearing before Pathik J. the Appellant was}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 expressing conc}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 ern to have the caveat remain u}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ntil the in}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 qu}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 est was reopened. This}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 reflected his assertion that the Respondents were responsible for the deceased's}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 death. Pathik J.'s notes record that the Appellant said in argument that he was not satisfied with the outcome of the inquest, and that this was the ground for objecting}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 to the removal of the caveat. This was the only ground considered in the reasons}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid4598501 
 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 for judgment.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
It is not that his Lordship rejected or failed to consider material relied on by the Appellant. On the contrary, his Lordship was not asked to have regard to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 the material which the notice of appeal now contends constitutes }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954 evidence establishing fraud, und}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ue influence and duress, and testamentary incapacity.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954\charrsid14055667 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid14055667 If, as}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 the Appellant contends in his notice of appeal, Pathik J. erred by misunderstanding the extent of the grounds he was relying on, the time to develop that contention was during the hearing before the Court of Appeal.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
However the judgment of the Court of Appeal indicates that this did not happen. The Court of Appeal referred to the passages from the judgment of Pathik J. set out above, and said that the Appellant advanced no argument before
 the Court of Appeal to demonstrate that the High Court erred in coming }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid14055667 to the conclusion that it did. }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
The Court of Appeal then noted tha}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954 t the proceedings before Pathik}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 J. had been adjourned on several occasions over several months whilst the Appellant had sought to have the inquest reopened.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954  The Court of Appeal concludes }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 that the trial judge was correct not to allow the Appellant further time to pursue attempts to have the inquest reopened.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid12729954\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 On the basis that the only ground of opposition to the removal of
 the caveat put forward by Appellant was that this should await the reopening of the inquest, and further investigation, we consider the decisions of the Courts below were clearly correct.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Since the decision of the Court of Appeal the Appellant has contin
ued his campaign to have the inquest reopened. He has placed before this Court many letters that he has sent to the offices of the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General.
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid9583599 
\par These }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 letters point out alleged differences or inconsistencies in statements given by various witnesses who were interviewed by police officers who investigated the deceased's de}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 ath. The correspond}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
ence which the Appellant has entered into is not relevant to the question whether error occurred in the Courts below, and cannot influence the outcome of this appeal.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 In light of the way the pr}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 oceedings were conducted by the }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
Appellant b}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 efore Pathik J}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 .,}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9583599  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 and before the Court of Appeal, it is now too late for the Appellant to raise in this Court factual issues about fraud, undue influence and duress, and}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 testamentary capacity. These w}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 ere factual issues that should h}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ave been developed by}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9583599  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 him in the lower Court
s. Where a party in putting forward his case at trial relies on certain facts, but fails to persuade the Court, he is not permitted on appeal to mount a different case on other facts that were known at the time but were not relied on. A party is bound by 
the way he conducts his case. If this were not so litigation would never be brought to finality.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Notwithstanding our view that it is not open to the Appellant in this Court to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 raise and rely on factual matters }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 not}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
 developed in the Courts below, we have}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 considered the affidavit and exhibits of the Appellant filed in the High Court on 9}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
April 1996. This is the affidavit which he now contends provides the evidentiary basis for his contentions. In our opinion the affidavit falls far short of establishing an}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 arguable case that the testator lacked testamentary capacity at the date of his last}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 will, or that the will was executed in circumstances suggestive of fraud or undue}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 influence or duress. It is hardly surprising that these allegations were not maintained in the lower Courts.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
In support of the allegation of fraud, the Appellant in his affidavit of 9 April 1996 exhibits a copy of the deceased's last will made on 16 November 1991, and also a copy of an earlier will made on 10 September 1985. The Appellant points
 out that signatures said to be those of the deceased on the two documents are not alike, and therefore, he argues, the signatures on the last will are not those of the deceased. The signatures on the two documents are certainly different, but the decease
d was a man of advancing years who had been suffering from alcoholism.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 It is quite possible that his}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  signature changed significantly in the period between the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
two wills.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Importantly, no evidence of comparative signatures of the deceased on other documents a
round 16 November 1991 was put forward by the Appellant, and no evidence was brought forward from the witnesses to the deceased's last will. Those witnesses were a solicitor and a law clerk}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9583599 .}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  In the absence of evidence from these sources the apparent differences in the signatures on the two wills prove nothing.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The affidavit of 9 April 1996 canvasses facts and allegations said to suggest the involvement of the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  Respondents and other family m}
{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 embers in the deceased's death and to show their hostility towards t
he Appellant. These allegations were relevant to issues that fell within the investigative jurisdiction of the magistrate conducting the inquest. The affidavit also exhibits a letter }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6638795 d}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ated 5 April 1994 written by solicitors representing Dr Arun Prasad Sharma to solicitors acting for the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Appellant.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
The letter is marked "without prejudice" and refers to an offer to settle}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
issues over the distribution of moneys due to certain family members of the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  d}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
eceased under the will after the grant of Probate. The letter outlines one of the}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 conditions of the proposed settlement, saying:}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid13656591 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 
"Thus this is the settlement which we as Counsels together with our respective clients have agreed upon the condition that the inquest shall }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6638795 b}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 e closed without further progress or}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6638795  }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 
development in the Suva Magistrate's Court ...:"
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
The letter asks the recipient to endorse his agreement to the terms of settlement. The exhibited letter does not show such an endorsement. Without much more detail about the negotiations for the proposed settlement and}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
correspondence which followed the letter of 5 April 1994, the letter itself establishes nothing that would have justified not removing the caveat. Further, the Appellant in the affidavit of 9 April 1996 deposed that on 5 December 1994 (eight m
onths after the alleged settlement) he was called to give evidence at the inquest. The inference arising from this is e}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 ither that the proposed settlem}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 ent did not go ahead, or that the proposed condition that the inquest be closed was withdrawn. The inquest did go ahead.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The balance of the affidavit of 9 April 1996 exhibits correspondenc}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 e entered into by the Appellant }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 as he sought to have the inquest reopened after the findings were handed down in March 1995. The attempts made by the Appellant at that time 
to have the inquest reopened were taken into account by both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal.
\par 
\par On the issue of undue influence and duress the Appellant failed to place an
y evidence at all on the Court file, either in his affidavit of 9 April 1996 or otherwise. The issue is raised by paragraph 4 of a 'Statement of Defence' filed in the probate proceedings on 23 April 1993 which reacts:}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid13656591 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 "}{\i\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 THAT}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591  I }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid13656591 further}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591  say that the said wil
l was executed by my father under due (sic) pressure and duress."
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 No particulars of this bald allegation are given, and it is not supported by any}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 evidence.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
On the issue of testamentary capacity the Appellant in his affidavit of 9}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 April 1996 says}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid13656591 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid13656591 "}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 2. }{
\i\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 That }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 in the month of October 1991, three properties of the Testator was }{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid13656591 Transferred}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591  (sic) to}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6179520  the Testators wife as gift by J}{
\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 ustice of Peace, Jerry Tikaram at the Testator's Residence."
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 This statement, withou}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 t more, does not even raise a q}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 
uestion about the testamentary}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591  }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 capacity of the deceased, let alone provide evidence of incapacity.}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 There was no medical evidence, or evidence about irrational behaviour of the deceased at or about the time he executed his will that could raise even a suspicion that he lacked
 testamentary capacity.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 The Appellant in his written submis}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 sions to this Court also contend}{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 s that the Courts below failed to take into account an af}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 fidavit by him sworn on 27 May }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 1996.
\par 
\par That affidavit deals only with why he was not present before Fati}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6179520 a}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 ki}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 J}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 . at the hearing on 7 July 1995.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557  }{
\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 It is clear that Pathik J. did take that affidavit into account.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 In our opinion the present appeal is without substance and should be dismissed with costs.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15490767 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 H}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6179520 on Justice John Von }{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid15490767 Doussa}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 
\par }{\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 Judge}{\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid15490767  of Supreme Court
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15490767 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid15490767 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15490767 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 Hon Justice Sir Kenneth Keith
\par }{\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 Judge of Supreme Court}{\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid15490767 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15490767 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15490767 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 H}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid15490767 on Justice Robert F}{
\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 rench
\par }{\b\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591\charrsid15490767 Judge of Supreme Court
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid459557 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid13656591 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid13656591 Solicitors:}{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557 
\par }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11030461\charrsid13656591 
\par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid459557\charrsid459557 Appellant in Person
\par Messrs G.P. Lala & Associates, Suva for the Respondents
\par }}