Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M.G.S. KAMAL, J
MRS. SWETHA THIMMIAH – Appellant
Versus
NIL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks letters of administration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. insistence on sureties questioned. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. court considers execution requirements. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. definition and purpose of administrator established. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. provisions of law concerning sureties clarified. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 6. discretionary power of the court to require sureties. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. circumstances exempting surety requirements detailed. (Para 22) |
| 8. deceased's will and codicil analyzing bequests. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 9. details of assets pertinent to administration bond. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 10. court concludes necessity of bond. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 11. petitioner required to furnish bond for specific debts. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 12. court refrains from ruling on definitions of surety and security. (Para 32 , 33) |
ORAL ORDER ON I.A.1/2025 & I.A.No.2/2025
2. Another application in I.A.2/2025 is filed under Rule 17 of Rules Governing Probate and Administration Matters 1964 (hereinafter referred to as Rules 1964) read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure seeking direction to the Registry to accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner.
ORDER
2. Registry is directed to issue
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
