Advanced Search Results

N. Anantha Kumar Vs. P. Anjaneyulu and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Property

Acts : Hindu Succession Act, 1956 - Sections 30; ;Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 57, 59 and 63

Reported in : 2004(4)ALT98

provisions of Section 30 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, r/w. Sections 59 and 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant/plaintiff had taken this Court thoroughly through the findings recorded by the Court … on the file of District Munsif, Medak for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the plaint schedule properties pleading in the plaint as hereunder:7. The plaintiff is the owner, possessor and title holder of the

Anil Kakkar & Ors. Vs.hans Raj Kakkar & Anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

conclusive proof of the legal character throughout the world. An assessment of the relevant provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 does not convey a meaning that by the Proceedings filed for grant of probate or letters of administration, … old Act, is a general one and would apply to suits to which no other article in the schedule applies." 13. Article 137 of the Limitation Act reads as follows: Description of Suit Period of Time from

V Sreedhara Murthy vs Bramhanara Sangha (R)

Court : Karnataka

Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act and also definition of Will under Section 2(h) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 i.e., Will means the legal declaration of the intention of thetestator with respect to his property which he … the Trial Court granted the relief of declaration declaring that plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property by virtue of Ex.P3-Will deed and defendant is directed to deliver vacant possession of suit schedule property … under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960. It was formed and registered on 04.10.1980 with an object of doing social and charitable work in the community.

Smt. M.S.Komala vs Sri M.N.Srinivasan

Court : Karnataka

execution of the Will?(5) Whether the Will has been executed in accordance with Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, read with Section 68 of the Evidence Act?30. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/defendants has placed … in terms of the said Will. They also sought for such other consequential and appropriate reliefs.(B) The suit schedule property includes House bearing No.S-50, situated at KIRLOSKAR Colony, 3rd stage, Kamalanagar Main Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore- 560079 (hereinafter … Deepika(D-9) T. Jayalakshmi (Daughter) N.Venkatesh Muniswamy T.Prabhakar V.Sonappa (Pltf No.3) Born on 04.03.1977 Smt. Komal M.S Girish M.S Miss Beena M.S Shashikiran Chandrashekhar Sowmya Shruthi

Sri. M R Mohan Kumar Vs. Nil

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

of transfer of khatha. There is no impediment under Section 276 or under any other provision of Indian Succession Act, 1925 or any Enactment for granting Probation Certificate and accordingly, prayed the Court to issue Probate/Succession Certificate in favour … dismissing the petition filed for issuance of probate.3. The appellants have sought the probate stating that the petition schedule property belongs to one Sannarangappa and the same was granted to them vide RUC No.34/1978-79 dated 22.11.1978 and … in two daily newspapers i.e., Hosadigantha on 16.12.2022 and Indian Express on 04.03.2023 and none appeared and contested the matter. Hence, the respondent is nil.

K.G.Sunil Krishnan, vs K.G.Premsankar,

Court : Kerala

resisted the original petition through Ext.P2 objection, disputing the Will.7. This Court has framed Rules under the Indian Succession Act 1925. It is profitable to extract Rule 26 of the Rules, which reads thus:“26. Conversion of application into suit.-- … the original petition atRs.50,000/- and paid a court fee of Rs.6,000/- under Sec.56 read with Article 6 of Schedule I of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1959 (in short ‘Court Fees Act’).(iii) The respondent

Sri. M R Mohan Kumar vs Nil

Court : Karnataka

of transfer of khatha. There is no impediment under Section 276 or under any other provision of Indian Succession Act, 1925 orany Enactment for granting Probation Certificate and accordingly, prayed the Court to issue Probate/Succession Certificate in favour of … S.C.No.25/2022 dismissing the petition filed for issuance of probate.3. The appellants have sought the probate stating thatthe petition schedule property belongs to one Sannarangappa and the same was granted to them vide RUC No.34/1978-79 dated 22.11.1978 and … issued in two daily newspapers i.e., Hosadigantha on 16.12.2022 andIndian Express on 04.03.2023 and none appeared and contested the matter. Hence, the respondent is nil.

Neelakshi B.Patel @ Neelakshi vs Divyesh S.Shah @ Shah Divyesh Shantil ...

Court : Chennai

Shah.2. The relevant background may first be noticed. O.P.No.37 of 2023 was filedunder Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of succession certificate in respect of certain securities of late Deena S. Shah @ Deena Shantilal … in O.P.No.37 of 2023 granting succession certificate to the 1st Respondent in respect of securities specified in the schedule. For Applicant(s): M/s.D.Baskar E.Ashok Kumar K.B.Rohith Pooja JFor Respondent(s): Ms.A.Madhumathi for R1. Mr.N.P.R.Ayyanar for R2.ORDERThis application, has been

Bala Vadivambal vs Meera

Court : Chennai

property.12. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs that as perSec. 88 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, when two clauses in respect of a gift are irreconcilable, the last clause in the Will shall prevail. … maintainable.3.1 Vaiyapuri left a Will dated 03.02.1978 by which the first defendantwas granted absolute interest over the “C” schedule properties. Shanmugasundarambal was only given with a life estate and the first plaintiff was granted with a right … to dismiss the suit.9. On perusal of the Ex.A6 - Will dated 04.02.1978 (equivalent toEx.B1) it is seen that the Will was executed by the

Ramesh Nivrutti Bhagwat Vs. Surendra Manohar Parakhe

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

of administration granted by the court was an ancillary grant under Sections 228 and 271 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and could not be revoked as long as the original grant subsisted. 6 The Superior Court of California … is whether there is any limitation prescribed and if not, whether the residuary provision (Article 137 in the schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 - hereafter “the Act”) applies and for which the starting point of limitation … to costs. [ARUN MISHRA]. ........................................J.........................................J.[VINEET SARAN]. [S. RAVINDRA BHAT]. ........................................J.New Delhi, October 04, 2019.