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

2022 Supreme(Tri) 390

ARINDAM LODH
Prashanta Laskar – Appellant
Versus
Debabrata Laskar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Arindam Lodh, J. - Heard Mr. SC Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants. None appears for the respondents despite receipt of notice.

1. This is an appeal filed under Section 299 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT , 1925 read with Section 96 and Order XLI Rule 1 CPC against the judgment and order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, West Tripura, Sonamura in case No. T.S. (Probate) 01 of 2017.

2. The short question involves in this appeal is that the appellant herein filed an application for granting Probate Certificate in favour of him. The application had been admitted into the court of learned Additional District Judge, Sonamura. Summons were issued to the respondents. They appeared. Issues were framed. Evidences were recorded. Thereafter, having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, the learned Additional District Judge, Sonamura, dismissed the application on the sole ground that the Additional District Judge has no jurisdiction to grant Probate Certificate and the jurisdiction only lies with the District Judge of the said District.

3. When the judgment was passed, the court of Additional District Judge, Sonamura was wi

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