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

2000 Supreme(Gau) 164

N.C.JAIN, P.G.AGARWAL
Hashida Khatoon – Appellant
Versus
Akhtar Hussain – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.Medhi, K.L.Gupta

N. C. Jain, J.—

This Letters Patent Appeal against the. judgment and order dated 22.2.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in FA (Probate) No. 9 of 1997 in our considered view deserves to be dismissed in limine.

2. On perusal of the judgment of the learned Single Judge two questions arose. The testator of the Will having willed away only 1/3rd of the property, 2/3rd of the property is still available to all the heirs and therefore there is no violation of clause 118 of the Mohammedan Law.

3. Adverting to the question whether the Will was duly executed or not, we have examined the finding recorded by the Probate Court. The Probate Court after discussing the entire evidence of the scribe and the attesting witness has recorded a firm finding of fact that the Will was duly executed and attested. The finding so recorded reads as under :

“10. To prove execution of the Will the plaintiffs have examined plaintiff No. I Md Akhtar Hussain, Topaswer Das (PW 2), Aftab Hussain (PW 3) and Niajuddin Ahmed (PW 4). PW 2 Topaswer Das avers in his evidence that he wrote the Will marked Ext 1 at the dictation of the testator" Chakina Bibi on 24.8.87 that that time Chakina Bibi was in good health and




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