Back
G. S. AHLUWALIA
Kamla Bai (Smt. ) (Dead) Through LRs – Appellant
Versus
Narmada Prasad (Dead) Through LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This Second Appeal under section 100 of CPC has been filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 10.10.1994 passed by 4th Additional District Judge to the Court of District Judge, Sagar in Civil Appeal No. 22-A/1992, thereby reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 9.4.1992 passed by 2nd Civil Judge Class 2, Sagar in Civil Suit No. 87-A/1991.
2. The Appeal was admitted on the following Substantial Question of Law :
“Was the original holder Laxman not competent to execute the Will Ex. P.5, regarding the property alleged to be ancestral.”
3. I.A. No. 12009 of 2011 has been filed under section 100(5) of CPC, whereas I.A. No. 10367 of 2017 has been filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC.
4. The Counsel for the Appellant didnot refer to these applications at all. Thus, it is clear that Counsel for the Appellants was not interested in pressing I.A. No. 12009 of 2011 and I.A. No. 10367 of 2017, accordingly, the same are dismissed as not pressed.
5. The facts of the present case in short are that Narmada Prasad filed a suit for declaration of title by pleading interalia that Laxman S/o Ram Prasad Patel was the owner of Kh. No 89 and 92. Laxman was the exclusive owner of Kh. No. 158/2
(1) Proof of execution of Will—It is for Propounder had to show that Will was signed by testator and testator was in sound and disposing state of mind at relevant time.(2) Partition of coparcenary pr....
The properties in question were determined to be ancestral, granting coparcenary rights to the daughter under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Children from void marriages cannot inherit ancestral property; their rights are confined to their parent's property, consistent with Hindu Succession Act amendments.
The court affirmed that coparcenary properties cannot be unilaterally willed, preserving the equal rights of all coparceners under Hindu law.
legal requirements of proving the Will has been satisfied and the factum of excluding the plaintiff Akha from the properties by the testator is reflected in the Will itself, are sufficiently proved. ....
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
