Advanced Search Results

Syed Askari Hadi Ali Augustine Imam and anr. Vs. State (Delhi Admn.) a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Succession Act, 1865 - Sections 63 and 276; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 8, 8(1), 40 to 43 and 68; Probate and Administration Act, 1881 - Sections 12 and 59; Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 227 and 273; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 420, 444, 448 and 468; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 300, 309, 340(1), 341, 343(2); Constitution of India - Article 136; ; ;

Reported in : 2009AIRSCW3251; AIR2009SC3232; JT2009(4)SC522; 2009(3)SCALE604; (2009)5SCC528; 2009AIRSCW3251; 2009(2)LHSC961; [2009] 3 SCR 1017

administrator : vide Sections 12 and 59, Probate and Administration Act, 1881, corresponding to Sections 227 and 273, Succession Act, 1925, which now incorporates that Act, Section 41, Evidence Act etc: Babu Lal v. Hari Bakhsh (1918) 13 P.R. … and this is done at the stage when the proceeding is concluded and the final judgment is rendered. Section 341 provides for an appeal against an order directing filing of the complaint. The hearing and ultimate decision of

M vs.A

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

―Section 21 -Succession to property of parties married under Act - Notwithstanding any restrictions contained in the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), with respect to its application to members of certain communities, succession to the property of … contracted shall be void.‖ Relevant Judgments 9.1. In Dr. Abdur Rahim Undre v. Padma Abdur Rahim Undre, AIR1982Bom 341, a Muslim boy married a Hindu girl on 6th May, 1966 before the Registrar and the marriage was

Emperor Vs. Trimbak Damodar Herlekar

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : AIR1938Bom352; (1938)40BOMLR495

to pass any order with regard to the accused who is able to understand the proceedings. - INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT (39 OF 1925), Section 63: [S.B. Sinha & Cyriac Joseph, JJ] Will Validity - Deceased, was a very … Divatia, J.1. This is a reference made by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dharwar City, under Section 341 of the Criminal Procedure Code. There were two accused in the case. The first accused is the son

Balan Vs. Sivagiri Sree Narayana Dharma Sanghom Trust

Court : Kerala

Subject : Civil

Acts : Kerala High Court Act, 1958 - Sections 3, 5, 7, 207 and 207(1); Delhi High Court Act - Sections 10(1); Madhya Pradesh Letters Patent Act; Bombay Letters Patent Act; ;Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 2(9), 2(14), 23(3), 24, 104, 105, 141 and 151; Industrial Disputes Act - Sections 17B; Patna Letters Patent Act; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 107 and 223; Constitution of India - Articles 136, 225, 227 and 228; Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 299; Delhi Rent Control Act; Government of India Act, 1915 - Sections 39 and 108; Agriculturists Debt Relief Act, 1958 - Sections 7; Patents Act - Sections 104; Specific Relief Act - Sections 8; Karnataka High Court Act - Sections 4; Land Acquisition Act - Sections 54; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections

Reported in : AIR2006Ker58; 2006(4)CTC273; [2006(2)JCR94]; 2005(4)KLT865

even though an order passed by a single Judge of the High Court under Section 299 of the Succession Act, 1925 is not strictly a decree, it will come within the scope of judgment under Letters Patent Clause 15. … both sides, we are of the view that the contention of the first respondent cannot be accepted. True, Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for any appeal from an order passed under Section

Dwarkadas Nathamal Vs. Vimal Alias Yamuna and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 2, Rules 1 and 2, 2(2) and 2(3) - Order 21, Rules 100 and 103; Limitation Act - Sections 2 - Schedule - Article 109

Reported in : AIR1964Bom42; (1963)65BOMLR588; ILR1964Bom68

Appeal No. 342 of 1950, decided by Kotval J., on August 31, 1956 (Unrep.), referred to. - INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT (39 OF 1925), Section 63: [S.B. Sinha & Cyriac Joseph, JJ] Will Validity - Deceased, was a very … Bom. L.R. 9, Muhammad Hafiz v. Muhammad Zakariya (1921) L.R. 49 I.A. 9 : S.C. 24 Bom. L.R. 341, Bhumanna v. Narayan (1960) 63 Bom. L.R. 269 : S.C. [1960] N.L.J. 765, Dullabhbhai v. Gulabbhai (1937) 40

M. Subbarayudu and ors. Vs. the State

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1898 - Sections 209 and 437; Andhra State Act, 1953 - Sections 53

Reported in : AIR1955AP87; 1955CriLJ770

in -- 'AIR 1927 Rang 4 (D), -- 'Gurbhaj v. Lachhman', AIR 1925 Lah 341 (I) ;-- 'Sherkhan v. Muzaffar Khan', AIR 1920 Lah 321 … 1952 Madh B 171 (F) held that the Madhya Bharat High Court could not be looked upon as successor to Indore High Court or any High Court of any covenanting State and, therefore, the High Courts of … The learned Public Prosecutor, who appeared for the State, further contended that the provisions of the Andhra State Act (30 of 1953) would indicate that the law of the Madras High Court which term is wide enought … or such an earlier date as may be appointed under sub-s. (2). Section 40 of the Act provided that the jurisdiction of High Court of

Sri S Krishna Rao Vs. M J Vittal

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

evidence tendered in proof of a will should additionally satisfy the requirement of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. If after considering the matters before it, that is, … us has, in the presence of the testatrix, signed his name hereunder as attesting witness: Sd/- (K.R.Chakrapani Rao) 341, Sadasiva Nagar Bangalore- 80. Sd/- (M.N.Krishna Ram Rao) 341, Sadashiva nagar Bangalore - 560 080.84. In the case

Sri K Jagannath Rao Vs. M J Vittal

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

evidence tendered in proof of a will should additionally satisfy the requirement of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. If after considering the matters before it, that is, … us has, in the presence of the testatrix, signed his name hereunder as attesting witness: Sd/- (K.R.Chakrapani Rao) 341, Sadasiva Nagar Bangalore- 80. Sd/- (M.N.Krishna Ram Rao) 341, Sadashiva nagar Bangalore - 560 080.84. In the case

Kumud Lall versus Suresh Chandra Roy (Dead) Through Lrs and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2026] 5 S.C.R. 301

Suits Act of 1855, Indian Succession Act of 1925, etc.;[2026] 5 S.C.R. 341 Kumud Lall v. Suresh Chandra Roy (Dead) Through Lrs and Othersii. That … to what extent.Headnotes†Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - ss.13(7), 2(b)(v) - Consumer Protection Act, 2019 - ss.38(12), 2(5)(vi) - Succession Act, 1925 - s.306 - Legal Representatives Suits Act, 1855 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Ord. 22, r.4 … heirs. On notice, both wife and son filed applications4 under Order XXII5 Rule 16 and 47 read with Section 1518 of Code of Civil Procedure (in short ‘CPC’) and Section 229 of 1986 Act, praying to drop

Vinodchandra Sakarlal Kapadia Vs. State of Gujarat .

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

of List III of Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and a concurrent subject, the Central legislation namely Indian Succession Act, 1925 must hold the field and any prohibition in the State enactment inconsistent with the general principles of the … those who have been included in the public notification as per Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution. The expression “person” used in Section 42(b) … were set out by the Division Bench as under:-. “We are called upon to decide as to whether Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, Act, 1948 (for short ‘the Bombay Tenancy Act’) debars an