RAJIV SHARMA, MAHENDRA DAYAL
Satnam Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Satyedra Pal Singh – Respondent
Rajiv Sharma and Mahendra Dayal, JJ.
Both the aforesaid First Appeals from Order involve a common question of law as to whether a beneficiary under a will can maintain a petition for obtaining probate under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act?
The common facts in both the aforesaid appeals are that late Sardar Brijendra Singh Sarna (now deceased) executed two Wills, one registered Will dated 13.4.2005 was executed in favour of the appellant of F.A.F.O. No. 114 of 2013, namely, Smt. Satnam Kaur and another unregistered Will dated 24.3.2004 is alleged to have been executed by him in favour of the respondent no.2, who is the appellant in F.A.F.O. No. 222 of 2013, namely, Devendra Pal Singh. Both the appellants separately filed a petition for issue of probate. The petition filed by Smt. Sarnam Kaur was registered as Civil Misc. Case No. 167 of 2009 while the petition for grant of probate filed by Devendra Pal Singh was registered as Civil Misc. Case No. 225 of 2009. The learned court below by passing a common order rejected both the petitions for grant of probate, mainly on the ground that as per the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Bim
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.