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

2003 Supreme(Del) 265

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
GURBUX KAUR – Appellant
Versus
HARI SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ADARSH B.DAYAL, P.K.Seth

VIKRAMAJIT SEN

( 1 ) IN Suit No. 2392 of 1996 the Plaintiff is the daughter of late Sardar Kundan Singh who died on 17. 8. 1981 and in Suit No. 2418 of 1996 the Plaintiff is the daughter of late Sardar Polo Singh who is stated to have died on 4. 11. 1997. The parties are cousins of each other. The prayer in Suit No. 2392/96 is for the passing of a decree declaring the dissolution of the sundry partnership firm, in which Plaintiff s father was a partner, for the rendition of accounts thereof, and for possession of immovable properties in which Plaintiff s father held a share. In Suit No. 2418/96 the prayers are essentially the same and so far as the facts are concerned the difference is that the claim is in respect of the estate of Sardar Polo Singh.

( 2 ) IT appears that the Defendants herein had fired the first salvo in the shape of probate petitions in which they had propounded Wills allegedly executed by late Sardar Kundan Singh and late Sardar Polo Singh in their favour. These probate petitions came to be dismissed by K. Ramamoorthy, J. by a common Judgment dated 6. 8. 1996. It is the uncontroverted case of the parties that it is the Defendants who were in possession of the immo















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