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

DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
V.K. Sawhney – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


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 alternative Will dated 09.09.2008 duly executed by Late Smt. Shanti Sawhney, if the Will dated 10.01.2011 is found defective or invalid due to any reason thereof, in favour of the Petitioner herein"

3. The Objector no. 5 in its reply has taken a preliminary objection that the proposed amendment introduces a fresh cause of action and changes the nature of the peti

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