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

2004 Supreme(All) 288

V.N.SINGH, A.K.YOG
BLMLA GALNDHAR – Appellant
Versus
UMA GALNDHER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.L.GROVER, R.K.AVASTHI, RAMESH SINGH

A. K. YOG, J.

( 1 ) ABOVE First Appeal from order under Section 299 of the Indian Succession act 1925, called the Act filed by Smt. Bimla Galndhar is against the judgment and order dated March 12th, 1966 passed by IHrd addl. District Judge, Saharanpur, deciding issue No. 3, viz. (whether a hindu is required to obtain a Probate in the State of U. P. in case of a will in his favour ?)

( 2 ) SMT. Bimla Gaindhar (appellant before us) had filed a petition under Section 276 of the Act for grant of Probate on the basis of purported will, an unregistered document (paper No. 10-A1 on original record ).

( 3 ) WE are omitting to give other details as the same is not required for the purpose of deciding the issue in hand and for disposal of the present first appeal from order.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the impugned judgment and order dated March 12, 1996, Learned addl. District Judge came to the conclusion, relying upon two single Judge reported decisions by he bench of learned single Judge, air 1978 All 268 (Bhaiya Ji v. Jageshwar dayal Bajpaai) and AIR 1978 All 301 (Smt. Pitamo v. Shayam Singh) that no probate was required in the facts of the instant case and consequently held that the proceedings o




















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