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

1994 Supreme(Raj) 596

N.C.KOCHHAR
Surendra Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Poonam Bhatia – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. - The petitioner wants to prove that Shri Sudarshan Kumar Bhatia (the deceased), the late husband of the respondent No. 1 and the father of the respondent No. 2 and who was the brother of the petitioner, had executed a will while he was staying at Frank-furt in Germany in presence of Mrs. Brigitte Rosmarie Goerke, resident of Bohmerstrassee 5,6000 Frank-furt am Main, West Germany and Dr. Ury Fehr, resident of Wilhelm-Busch-Strass 16, 6096 Raunheim, West Germany,whereby he had bequeath his property in favour of the petitioner and the respondent No. 2. The genuineness of the will is in dispute and, in order to prove that the will propounded by the petitioner is the last will and testament of the deceased, the petitioner wants to examine the above said two witnesses as the attesting witnesses of the will. The learned trial court directed the petitioner to procure the attendance of the witnesses, but, he having failed to do so, his request for their examination was rejected vide the impugned order dated 30-7-1993. Hence this revision petition by the petitioner.

2. It has not been disputed before me that the above said witnesses are residents of Germany and are not within the




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