Back
G. ARUL MURUGAN
K. Malarkodi – Appellant
Versus
Vanitha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(G. Arul Murugan, J.) :
(Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 29.06.2010 by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranipet and made in O.S. No.3 of 2009.)
This Appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.06.2010 in OS.No.3 of 2009 by the Additional District Court, Fast Track Court, Ranipet decreeing the suit in favour of the plaintiffs granting 1/8 share each or 4/8 share together in respect of items 1, 2 and 4 of the suit properties and dismissing the suit as against the item 3 of the suit property.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.
3. The Plaintiffs are the sons and daughters born through first wife of their father Kannan. Plaintiffs father divorced his first wife Alamelu and married the first defendant Malarkodi. The defendants 2 to 4 are the children born through the first defendant.
4. It is the case of the plaintiff that their father was working as the Office Assistant in the Office of the fifth defendant/LIC and died in harness, leaving behind the Plaintiffs and the defendants 1 to 4 as his
A will must be executed and attested as per legal requirements to be valid, and a nominee under the Life Insurance Act does not have absolute rights over the benefits but holds them in trust for the ....
Nomination in insurance does not confer absolute rights over terminal benefits, which pertain to legal heirs under succession laws.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that nomination under Section 39 of the Insurance Act, 1938 does not confer any beneficial interest on the nominee, and the amount payable under th....
A nominee does not inherit the estate of the deceased and must distribute amounts to legal heirs according to succession laws.
Nomination does not confer ownership rights; legal heirs retain entitlement to the deceased's estate under succession laws.
Nominees do not inherit the estate of the deceased; they must distribute amounts to legal heirs according to succession laws.
The court affirmed the validity of a Will executed under proper procedures, ruling that mere relationships or opportunities do not imply undue influence unless proven with clear evidence.
The court affirmed the validity of a Will and upheld its execution despite claims of suspicion, indicating that the exclusion of a child does not inherently nullify a Will.
The classification of properties as joint family or self-acquired depends on the presence of a joint family nucleus; discrepancies in the execution of the Will sow doubt on its validity due to mental....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
