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) 418

K.B.NAVADGI, M.P.CHANDRAKANTARAJ
R. VENKATACHALAM – Appellant
Versus
G. M. MASCARENHAS – Respondent


Advocates:
A.LOBO, ASHOK B.PATIL, B.P.HOLLA, K.R.D.KARANTH, Vidhya Shankar

CHANDRAKANTARAJ, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the Order dated 13th March, 1990 made by the learned probate Judge of this Court in Probate C. P. No. 13/89.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to this appeal may bestated briefly and they are as follows: one Dr. G. M. Mascarenhas filed Probate c. P. No. 13/89 in this Court seeking probate of the last Will and testamentary disposition of one miss. A. B. Madappa also known as Babs, since deceased. The Court admitted the petition and issued direction for citation, in one issue of Times of India dated 2-9-1989, that direction was carried into effect by the petitioner in the Probate court. But even before the citation was given effect to by the Court, the appellant before us had entered caveat in probate Court and, therefore, the question arose in the Probate Court whether the appellant before us could be said to have locus standi to enter caveat. In deciding that question, the learned Judge has considered the provisions made in Section 283 (1) (c) of the indian Succession Act read with Section 284 (1) of the same Act. In the course of the order made, the learned Judge has chosen to place reliance on the decision of the High Court of Madra



















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