KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR, J
SMT ADILAKSHMAMMA W/O MALLESHAPPA – Appellant
Versus
MUDDARANGAMMA W/O CHIKKATHIMMAIAH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing and challenge of applications under cpc. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's stance on will execution doubts. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. regulation of legatee's status and will proof. (Para 6 , 9) |
| 4. direction for prompt appeal resolution. (Para 7) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
2. M.F.A.No.1777/2019 and M.F.A.No.2899/2019 are filed challenging the order dated 03.01.2019 passed on I.A.No.17 and I.A.No.1 in R.A.Nos.115/2001 and 122/2001 respectively by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri, whereby the applications filed under Order XXII Rule 4 r/w. Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC came to be dismissed.
Being aggrieved by it, these two instant appeals are filed.
5. Just because the appellant being the impleading applicant, desires to come on record as a party and as a legatee under the Will, that does not amount to proving of Will; therefore, only for this limited purpose, the First Appellate Court ought to have allowed the applications permitting the appellant to come on record. Therefore, now it is made clear that the appellant, who is impleading applicant upon the applications filed only for the limited purpose, is permitted to come on record in the appeal as a legatee under the Will and
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.