As per case facts, Gour Lal Mitra (Testator) executed a will in 2001, for which Kamal Kr. Mitra sought probate. Defendants challenged the will, asserting the Testator lacked testamentary capacity ... and the will was obtained through undue influence and fraud, especially regarding properties where he only held a life interest from his father's will. They highlighted discrepancies in execution/registration dates and unexplained deprivation of other heirs. The question arose whether the will was duly executed in accordance with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, given the suspicious circumstances, and if the Testator had the mental and testamentary capacity to create it. Finally, the Court found the attesting witness's testimony contradictory regarding the execution date and failed to prove the presence of the second attesting witness, thus failing to dispel suspicious circumstances. Therefore, due execution of the will was not established, and probate was refused.