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

1972 Supreme(All) 168

R.L.GULATI
Ram Piari – Appellant
Versus
Board of Revenue, U. P, Allahabad – Respondent


Advocates:
S.B. Chaudhari and Ratnakar Chaudhary, for Petitioner; Standing Counsel, for Opposite Party.

ORDER :- This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

2. The petitioner was married to one Ram Adhin, who had 1/7th share in village Charapur Kauriya, District Unnao. Ram Adhin died on September 14, 1944, leaving behind the petitioner as his widow and his mother Smt. Poona. The petitioner was a minor then. Smt. Poona got her name entered over half the estate of Ram Adhin. She is alleged to have executed a will of her half share on October 28, 1947, in favour of respondent Nos.6 to 8, (hereinafter referred to as the 'contesting respondents'), who are the sons of her daughter. She died sometime in 1947 and after her death the contesting respondents got their names mutated over the land in dispute on the basis of the will of Smt. Poona. After the death of her mother-in-law the petitioner married one Beni Lodh.

3. After her remarriage the petitioner filed a civil suit in the Court of Munsif, Unnao, on 18th July, 1949, for possession of the half share of Ram Adhin which was mutated in the name of her mother-in-law, Smt. Poona. The suit was contested by Hira Lal, father of the contesting respondents, who were minors at that time. The pleas that Smt. Poona had executed a will i














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