B.S.RAIKOTE
Dokala Buchiraju – Appellant
Versus
Dokala Bangaramma (since died) – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS revision petition is filed by the original defendant challenging the judgment and order dated 21-8-1998 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur on I. A. No. 935/1997 in O. S. No. 45/1997.
( 2 ) BY the impugned order, Beela Parvati has been brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased sole respondent Dokala Bangaramma on the basis of the registered Will dated 8-1-1997, marked in the case as ex. A-1.
( 3 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the Will is not proved according to law and there are suspicious circumstances and the Will is a fabricated document at the instance of P. W. I, Beela Maheswara rao, the husband of Parvati. He further submitted that on the basis of the will, a person cannot be permitted to continue the suit in view of the judgment of this Court reported in A. Apparao vs. K. Ammoru. He submitted mat at any rate, the deceased was not of sound disposing state of mind and as such the will is not genuine. The lands are situated at Polavaram, within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrar, Polavaram, whereas, the Will is registered at rajahmundry. In fact, his client had filed Ex. B-6, a notice bef
TYNALA MUSALAYYA Vs J.MOHANRAJ
Casken Tea Industries Ltd., Hyderabad Vs Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Secunderabad
Masimukkula Narayana Vs Masimukkula Suryakantham
Akkarayoyina Apparao Vs Korad Ammoru
KRISHNAKUMAR V. GOVARDHAN NAIDU
TYNALA MUSALAYYA Vs J.MOHANRAJ
Casken Tea Industries Ltd., Hyderabad Vs Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Secunderabad
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.