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

1983 Supreme(Cal) 300

T.K.BASU, S.C.SEN
In the goods of : Judhisthir Dutta – Appellant
Versus
Bhanumati Dutta – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Goutam Chakraborti for appellant
P. K. Roy for respondent.

JUDGMENT

Suhas Chandra Sen, J. This appeal arises out of an application made by Rabindra Nath Dutta, the appellant before us, for setting aside an ex parte order passed on 15th October, 1982 granting probate of a will executed by one Judhisthir Dutta. The learned Trial Judge held that the application was not maintainable on the ground that it had been made under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Judge did not express any opinion on the question whether there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of the applicant at the time when the matter was called on for hearing. It was held that the only procedure for setting aside the ex parte grant of probate was by way of an application under S. 263 of the Indian Succession Act. Reliance was placed on a judgement delivered by Sudhindra Mohan Guha, J. in the case of Nityananda Pramanick v. Phurubala Pramanick 1982 CLJ 286 for the proposition that the provisions of Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure were not applicable for recalling an ex parte order granting probate of a will. The application made under Order 9 Rule 13 was dismissed with costs in that case.

2. Mr. Chakrabarty, appearing on behalf of the
















































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