SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(SC) 373

KURIAN JOSEPH, AMITAVA ROY
JAGDISH CHAND SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
NARAIN SINGH SAINI (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LRs. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

AMITAVA ROY, J.

Leave granted.

1. The genesis of the lingering dissension in the instant proceeding lies in the Will claimed by the appellant herein to have been executed on 22-10-1973 by Nathu Singh (since deceased), the predecessor in the interest of the respondents, thereby bequeathing the property mentioned therein to him (appellant). The judgment and order dated 15-05-2007 passed in P C No. 249/1980 (re-numbered as PC No. 160/2006), by the District Judge, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, granting Letter of Administration to him, has been reversed by the High Court of Delhi by its judgment and order dated 02-07-2014 rendered in FAO No. 279 of 2007 as assailed herein.

2. We have heard Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Daljeet Singh, Senior Advocate for the respondents.

3. A brief outline of the pleaded facts would portray the rival orientations. The appellant, to reiterate, filed an application under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 (for short hereinafter referred to as the Act) with the Will annexed, seeking grant of Letter of Administration. He stated that the Will had been executed by Mr. Nathu Singh on 22-10-1973, as the sole and absolute












































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top