BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK, SATYABRATA MITRA
HEMANTA KUMAR CHAUDHURY – Appellant
Versus
SUMITRA DEVI – Respondent
( 1 ) - This is an application for review of our judgment, dated 5th May, 1987, on the ground mentioned in the Memorandum of Review. The same are also stated in the petition.
( 2 ) WE are setting out the facts of this case from our judgment, review of which is sought for. These facts are not disputed and not under challenge in this application. The petition for grant of Probate was filed by one Smt. Sumitra Devi claiming herself to be a residual beneficiary under the last Will of the one Gajanand Chaudhury (hereinafter referred to as the Testator ). It was stated in the petition that the testator died on 9th October 1973 at No. 2/2a, Harrington Street, Calcutta within the jurisdiction of this Court. It was stated that the testator, during his life time, used to visit, from time to time and stay at his residential house at Sahabad Gate Hathras District Aligarh in the State of Uttar Pradesh where he had also considerable properties. Having regard to the importance of the averments made in paragraphs 4 and 6 of the said petition, we set out the same verbatim hereinbelow. "on the 4th day of March 1972 the deceased above named executed at Hathras outside the af
Indian Oil Corporation v. State of Bihar
Haji Ebrahim Kassani Coshinwalla v. Northern Indian Oil Industries Ltd.
Veluri Sitaramasastry and Ors. v. Isukpalli Sundaramma and Ors.
Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi
Mohindroo v. Dist. Judge, Delhi
Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. Workmen
Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan
REFERRED TO : Workmen of Cochin Port Trust Ltd., v. Board of Trustees
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.