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

1989 Supreme(Guj) 129

A.P.RAVANI
HARMANBHAI LALLUBHAI – Appellant
Versus
MAGANBHAI MATHURBHAI PATEL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: K.C.SHAH, K.R.BRAHMBHATT, K.V.SHELAT

A. P. RAVANI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners claim to be the legal representatives of the deceased judgment-creditor who died during the pendency of execution application. The petitioners applied for being joined as parties contending that the deceased judgment-creditor had executed Will in their favour and they were entitled to proceed further with the execution application. The respondent-original judgment-debtors contended that thee petitioners should be asked to obtain probate and/ or letters of administration with will annexed or without will annexed. Unless they obtain probate or the letters of administration they cannot be permitted to proceed with the execution application The trial Court upheld the contention filed by the petitioners herein. Against this order the petitioners have preferred this revision application.

( 2 ) THE respondents contend that in view of the provisions of Sec. 214 (1) (b) of the Indian Succession Act 1925 the petitioners have no right to proceed further with the execution application filed by the deceased judgment-creditor. The relevant part of Sec. 214 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 reads as follows:214 (1) No Court shall (a ). . . . . . . . . . . . .








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