Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
V.K. Sawhney – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. probate petition filed for the last will. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. objections raised against the amendment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner claims the 2011 will as last and final. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. dispute over allowing amendment after evidence commencement. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. application dismissed; evidence proceedings to continue. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J.
I.A. 664/2022
1. Application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for amendment of the plaint.
2. The present probate petition has been filed seeking probate in respect of the last Will dated 10.01.2011 by late Smt. Shanti Sawhney, the mother of the parties i.e. Smt. Shanti Sawhney in respect of her 50% of her share in respect of property bearing No. D-211, Saket, New Delhi-110017. It is submitted that Smt. Shanti Sawhney had also executed a previous Will dated 09.09.2008 in favour of the petitioner. However, the petitioner by way of abundant caution, seeks to modify the Prayer clause of the petition as follows:
"Grant a probate of the Will dated 10.01.2011 or in al
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
