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

1985 Supreme(Raj) 382

DINKAR LAL MEHTA
Parvati and Kaushlya – Appellant
Versus
Chhitarmal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. :- This is a revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 1st September, 1984, passed by the District Judge, Alwar, in a petition for grant of probate filed by non-petitioner, Chhitarmal.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the order 1st September, 1984.

3. It is alleged that the deceased, Smt. Kishan Pyari executed a will on 2nd September, 1978, in favour of the non-petitioner, Chhitarmal. Chhitar Mal applied for the grant of probate. Smt. Kaushlya caveator raised an objection under Section 283(c) of the Indion Succession Act that she may be allowed to contest the grant of probate on the ground that a part of the property did rot belong to the testatrix. It was submitted by the caveator that the disputed part of the property was of the ownership of her father and after the death of her father she became the sole owner. An objection was raised by the counsel for Chhitarmal, non-petitioner, that Smt. Parvati is having no locus standi and she cannot raise objection which she is raising in the probate proceedings.

4. Mr. R.M. Lodha with all fairness cited before me two cases of the Madras High Court. The Madras High Court in G















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