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

2001 Supreme(Cal) 428

PRATAP KUMAR RAY
BAJRANG SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
RAM KRISHNA KUNDU – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMIT BANERJI, INDRAJIT MONDAL, T.K.GHOSH

P. K. RAY,J.

( 1 ) THE defendant of Money Suit No. 9 of 1992, being the petitioner in this application under section 115 of the Code Civil Procedure has assailed the order dated 12. 8. 96 passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Bankura in connection with the said money suit, whereby and whereunder the application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the defendant praying for stay of the instant proceeding till the will is probated in the appropriate forum, was rejected only on the ground that two sons of the plaintiff though claimed to be the legal representatives to continue the suit on the basis of the will in view of their status as executors, but they had also the right as legal heirs on the property of the suit on pro rata basis.

( 2 ) THE petitioner herein has submitted that since all the legal heirs are not parties to the proceeding, and since only the executors under the will have been impleaded as parties to continue the suit, the left out legal heirs may cause problem until and unless the will is probated confirming the right of the executors, and in that view of the matter, the suit was required to be stayed till the concerned will was probated in




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