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

1991 Supreme(Del) 355

ARUN KUMAR, M.C.JAIN
HARNARAIN – Appellant
Versus
SHRI BUDBRAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BHASKAR TIVARI, J.K.SETH, O.N.Vohra, PUNAM CHAUDARY

Aran Kumar, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judg- ment dated 30th October i975 of a!ea.-aed Single Judge of this Court in F. A. O. No. 4ofl969. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge accepted the appeal of the respondent herein against the judgment of the trial court. The trial court had vide its judgment dated 4-11-1968 allowed the petition under Section 278 of (he Indian Succession Act and granted Setters of administration ia favour of the pelitianer (appellant herein ).

( 2 ) THE facts in the present appeal are that the appellant filed a peti- tion under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of letters of administration with respect to the Will dated 15th May 1964, Ex. P-l. The Will was made by Mahant Narsingh Dass, Chela ofmahantparshotam Dais, whereby the testator bequeathed all his movable and immovable property in favour of the appellant Har Narain and the respondent Budh Ram in the ratio of half and half each with a rider that if Budh Ram would sell his half share, it would be so only with the consent of Har Narain. It is a registered Will. The testator died on 19th May 1964, i. e. just four days after making and getting registe






















































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