AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, S. V. N. BHATTI
C. P. Francis – Appellant
Versus
C. P. Joseph – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V.N. BHATTI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. CR Pius and Philomina Pius possessed, as absolute owners, an extent of 7.875 cents of property in survey no. 60/6 of Elamkulam village and 3.233 cents in survey no. 60/6 of Elamkulam village, Kanyanoor Taluk, Ernakulam District, as described in plaint A and B schedules. On 24.11.2004, CR Pius died. On 27.11.2008, Philomina Pius died. The children/grandchildren of Pius and Philomina are the parties to the present litigation, and their genealogy is illustrated as follows:
3. On 15.12.1999, Philomina Pius executed a registered settlement deed in favour of CP Sebastian/Fourth Plaintiff, whereunder, she has settled an extent of 4 cents out of 7 cents in favour of the fourth plaintiff and retained 3.235 cents (Plaint B Schedule). Pius, admittedly, has been the absolute owner and possessor of Plaint A schedule property. On 27.01.2003, CR Pius and Philomina Pius executed the registered joint will in favour of CP Francis/Appellant for the Plaint A and B schedule properties. Antony (DW6), husband of Kavitha Antony/Defendant No. 3, and Ponsy (DW5), wife of Appellant, have subscribed their signatures as attestors. The salient features of the will d
Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari
Mehboob-Ur-Rehman v. Ahsanul Ghani
Kirpa Ram v. Surendra Deo Gaur
Kshitish Chandra Purkait v. Santosh Kumar Purkait
R. Nagraj (Dead) through LRs. and Anr. v. Rajmani and Ors
Suresh Lataruji Ramteke v. Sumanbai Pandurang Petkar
Gnanambal Ammal v. T. Raju Ayyar
K.S. Palanisami v. Hindu Community in General & Citizens of Gobichettipalayam
(1) Second appeal – High Court is competent and endowed with discretionary jurisdiction to formulate a substantial question of law not stated when second appeal was admitted – High Court is entitled ....
A bequest in a Will is void if attested by a beneficiary, as per Section 67 of the Indian Succession Act, impacting the validity of the Will.
Single attesting witness's testimony proving both attestations suffices for Will proof under Sections 63(c), Succession Act and 68, Evidence Act.
The validity of Wills and settlement deeds is contingent upon compliant proof under statutory provisions; failure results in dismissal of property claims.
The legal principle established in the judgment emphasizes the treatment of properties allotted in a partition deed as separate properties, and the burden of proof in establishing the invalidity of s....
The court ruled that the validity of a Will under the Indian Succession Act requires strict compliance with execution standards, and civil courts lack jurisdiction over intestate succession matters.
Truth and validity of a Will cannot be questioned by a stranger who is not claiming under testator or in any way interested in suit property.
Registered settlement deed proved under Evidence Act Section 68 proviso absent specific denial of execution; certified copy admissible if original lost; partition suit barred without cancelling deed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.