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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 3119

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN
BALASUBRAMANIAM – Appellant
Versus
CHINNUSAMY – Respondent


O R D E R

The unsuccessful petitioner in probate proceedings is the appellant herein.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the Probate OP.

3. The petitioner filed Probate O.P No.196 of 2008 before the Principal District Court, Salem and subsequently made over to I Additional District Judge, (Fast Track Court), Mettur on administrative grounds.

4. The subject matter of the Will is alleged to have been executed by Kandasamy Gounder and appellant herein is the grand son through daughter. The contesting respondent is the son of Kandasamy Gounder and the second respondent is the son of the first respondent/grandson of the said Kandasamy Gounder through son.

5. The brief facts that are necessary for determination of the appeal are as under -

5(i) As per the petition, the schedule of property absolutely belongs to Kandasamy Gounder s/o Chinappa gounder who is the maternal grandfather of the petitioner and the said Kandasamy Gounder acquired the property by virtue of a Registered Partition Deed bearing No.5790 of 1973 that are described as 'A' schedule property in the said partition deed. It is alleged that on 13.08.2003, the said Kandasamy Gounder

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