Back
G. ARUL MURUGAN
D. Swaminathan (died) – Appellant
Versus
Latha (minor) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The third defendant in the suit has filed the above Second Appeal and pending this Second Appeal, the sole appellant died and the appellants 2 to 4 were brought on record as his legal heirs.
2. The present Second Appeal has been filed as against the judgment and decree dated 16.06.2005 in A.S.No.162 of 1997 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Chennai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.06.1996 in O.S.No.3247 of 1993 passed by the First Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their litigative status as before the Trial Court.
The brief facts, which give rise to the instant second appeal, are as follows:
4. According to the plaintiffs, they are the absolute owners of the entire premises, bearing New No.16/2, Aziz Mulk 1st Street, Madras-6, measuring 1200 sq.ft. The plaintiffs and their mother were residing in the back portion of the said premises, measuring 530 sq.ft., which is terraced having first floor and the rest of the said property measuring 670 sq.ft is tiled, which is occupied by the defendants.
5. Further, according to the plaintiffs, the s
Revocation of Letters of administration nullifies the basis for recovery of possession, requiring validation of the Will before any legal action can proceed.
The revocation of letters of administration nullifies any legal actions taken based on the authority of those letters, and a will must be proven genuine before any claims based on it can be upheld in....
The duty of parties to come forward with a true case and true evidence, and the significance of prompt action in seeking probate of a Will.
Revocation of Letters of Administration under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act is justified if obtained through misrepresentation and failure to implead all legal heirs.
A will must be proved in accordance with the Evidence Act, particularly through attestors, to establish title in property disputes.
The court held that fraudulent concealment of material facts by original petitioners justified the revocation of Letters of Administration under Section 263(b) of the Indian Succession Act.
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
