1872 Sections 68 And 90 - Judgment Search Results

Sh Rajinder Kumar Kapur & Anr. Vs.sh Madan Mohan Lal Kapur & Anr.

Court: Delhi

to be proved by an attesting witness as is evident from Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 68 reads as under: - CS(OS) 2497/2015 Page 4 of 10 8. “68. Proof of execution of … itself shows that they have enormous sanctity especially in view of Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 90 reads as under:-"CS(OS) 2497/2015 … relinquishment deed shows that the same are duly registered with the relevant authorities. The documents are registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, the said GPAs and relinquishment deeds do not require to be proved

Palaniammal Vs. Pappathi

Court: Chennai

Will dated 9.5.1995 executed by Kulandaivel has been proved in accordance with Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by examining the attesting witnesses as P.W.2, who … failed to hold that the Will as contained in Ex.B1 dated 9.7.1969 was not proved in accordance with Sections 68 and 69 of the Indian Evidence Act? (ii)Whether the Courts below were wrong in holding that Ex.A3-the unregistered Will … treated as an ancient document enjoying the presumption as contemplated under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act 22.My mind is reminiscent and redolent of

Meenakshiammal (Dead) Through Lrs. and ors. Vs. Chandrasekaran and anr ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2005SC52; 2004(3)BLJR2289; JT2004(9)SC371; 2004(9)SCALE256; (2005)1SCC280

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, the facts and circumstances as emanating from the material … witnesses and the scribe. DW1 further deposed that Siva was 85 to 90 years old when he died on 6.11.1978 and that he died after … under Section 18 need not be followed. Section 95: [S.B.Sinha & Dr.Mukundakam Sharma,JJ] U.P. State Re-organization Act (2000), Sections 67,86 & 93 - State Co-operative Society - Bifurcation of state on reorganization Area of operation of Co-operative

Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2010(3)LC1650(SC)

the statement made in Court - Appeal Dismissed - A. Indian Succession Act, 1925, S.63 - Evidence Act, 1872, Section 68 - Will -Suspicious Circumstances -[ G.S. Singhvi and; Asok Kumar Ganguly, JJ.] Father of the 1st … 4.15 p.m., an FIR was registered against Malini Ramani (PW-6), Beena Ramani (PW-20) and George Mailhot (PW-24) under Sections 61/68/1/14 of the Punjab Excise Act. At about 8.30 p.m., PW-100 handed over the investigation to SHO S.K. … parcel containing broken glass pieces. The report of CFSL vide Ex PW 90/A proved that on comparison of S1 and S2 the two window panes

Vijay Kumar and ors. Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2003Delhi210; 101(2002)DLT385; 2003(66)DRJ364

if probate granted to executors of Will--Probate granted in respect of properties mentioned in the Will--Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 68. ;The Will has been exhibited. It has been categorically deposed that the Will was itself executed … Will.12. The petition stands disposed of, but with no order as to costs. Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 63, 373--Will--Probate proceedings--Will executed in presence of two witnesses who signed in presence of each other in the

Shantilal Vs. Mahendra Kumar and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 2002(3)WLN461

27 for taking additional evidence--Hence application of appellant for taking additional evidence liable to be rejected.;(c) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 68--Execution of will--In absence of any of the two attesting witnesses, the execution cannot be said … contesting second defendant on the ground that he failed to prove the Will in the manner provided by Section 68 of the Evidence Act, inasmuch as no attesting witness of the Will was examined. It is submitted

Bharpur Singh and ors. Vs. Shamsher Singh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR2009SC1766; 2009(2)ALT33(SC); 2009(1)AWC873(SC); JT2009(1)SC590; 2009(1)SCALE481; (2009)3SCC687; 2009AIRSCW1338; 2009(1)LHSC577; 2009(3)KCCRSN84

not mean that the statutory requirements of proving the Will need not be complied with. INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 Sections 68, 69 &70: [S.B.Sinha & Cyriac Joseph,JJ] Will - Nature of proof required- Held, The provisions of Section 90

M. Kuppusamy Naicker and Others Vs. M. Mani and Others

Court: Chennai

must put their signatures in the presence of the executor. 15. Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as follows: "68. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested. If a document … much less on 24.5.1990 and she passed away at the age of 90 and therefore, the Will in question is nothing but a concoction. 9. … Since the document in question is nothing but a Will, the Court has to look into the following sections of law. 13. Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 reads as follows: "(c) The Will shall

Bibo Devi and ors. Vs. Rattan Lal and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: ILR1972Delhi699

be present at the same time, and no particular form of attestation shall be necessary.(5) According to Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act any document required to be attested shall not be used as evidence until … on being asked to sign by Joti Parshad.(16) The presumption under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act cannot be invoked in respect of the … in the written statement.(4) Before secondary evidence relating to a document is given it must be proved (vide Section 65(c) of the Indian Evidence Act), among other things, that the original has been destroyed or lost, or

Raghavendra Rao and ors. Vs. N. Veeravenkatrao and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2002(3)KarLJ150

There shall be no order as to costs. Property - possession - Section 68 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - suit filed for possession of certain land - land in dispute purchased by father of petitioner but … the ground that the Deputy Commissioner has not referred the matter within 90 days from the date of receipt of the application Revision against Held, … defendant, the Trial Court should not have gone into the admissibility or otherwise of Ex. P. 2. Under Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, the admitted facts need not be proved. In view of the regrant