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

1990 Supreme(Kar) 118

K.S.BHATT
G. M. MASCARENHAS – Appellant
Versus
R. VENKATACHALAM – Respondent


Advocates:
K.R.D.KARANTH, S.VIJAYASHANKAR

SHIVASHANKAR BHAT, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner has questioned the competence of the caveat or and objects to the caveat. Petitioner applied on 31-7-1989, under the indian Succession Act, ('the Act' ) for the grant of a probate in respect of the Will left by Miss. Medappa; one of the items of the estate of the deceased is a school called 'home School', in bangalore. The petition was advertised in Times of India (Bangalore edition) dated 2-9-1989. The caveator filed his Caveat on 18-8-1989 wherein only a cryptic statement was made to the effect that nothing be done in the matter of the estate of the deceased without notice to the Caveator. The Caveator also filed LA. No. I seeking a direction to the State Bank of India not to permit the petitioner or anyone claiming under him to operate the S. B. Account which was a joint S. B. Account opened by the deceased along with the caveator (obviously, in connection with the administration of the Home School ). LA. No. II is filed by the Caveator seeking permission to amend the Statement of Objections. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner objected to the locus standi of the caveator, contending that, the Caveator has not disclosed his



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