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

1987 Supreme(Del) 248

ARUN B.SAHARYA
PARI HINGORANI – Appellant
Versus
SHAKUNTALA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mohinder Goel, RAJ PANJWANI, RAM PANJWANI, T.K.GANJU

( 1 ) THE basic question raised by Pari Hingorani and her husband, who are beneficial legatees under the will which is subject matter of the probate proceedings, is whether Shakuntala, a residuary legatee, ought to be restrained from proceeding with action in a London Court for grant of probate of the will to her.

( 2 ) DR. Rochiram Udhavdas Hingorani, hereinafter referred to as Dr. Hingorani, a Hindu, executed a will dated 14-2-1979 at Delhi, but did not appoint an executor. The testator bequeathed property No. 42, Anandlok in Delhi to his son Ram, his wife Pari and their daughter Angela. Except this property, he left unspecified residue of the estate to his daughter Shakuntala and her legal heirs. Relevant clauses 2 and 4 of the will read as follows :-

"on my death I bequeath to my son Ram his wife Pari and their daughter Angela, the house and property on plot No. 42, Anandlok Colony, New Delhi. 4. I leave to my daughter Shakuntala and her legal heirs all that might remain of my assets and personal papers and effects of any description at the time of my death, except the house and property on plot No. 42, Anandlok Colony, New Delhi. "

( 3 ) DR. Hingorani died on 28-4-1986 at London





























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