Gujarat High Court
Ramniklal P Ghedia-Legal Heirs Of ... vs Legal Heirs Of Decd. Shantaben ... on 30 March, 2017
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla
Bench: Rajesh H.Shukla
C/SA/201/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SECOND APPEAL NO. 201 of 2015
==========================================================
RAMNIKLAL P GHEDIA-LEGAL HEIRS OF SURESHCHANDRA R GHEDIA
& 1....Appellant(s)
Versus
LEGAL HEIRS OF DECD. SHANTABEN RATANSHI-JENTILAL RATANSHI
& 5....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH N NANAVATY, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 - 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 3 , 4.1 - 4.3 , 5 - 6
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date : 30/03/2017
ORAL ORDER
Draft Amendment is granted.
Admit.
The substantial questions of law posed are as follows:-
1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, can questions asked to witnesses to refresh their memory after showing the original document (disputed will) be termed as leading questions, and whether the learned Courts below were justified in holding so?
2. In absence of any objection raised by opponent or Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Aug 12 15:26:50 IST 2017 C/SA/201/2015 ORDER refusal of permission recorded by the learned trial Court, is it legal, valid and justified for the learned Trial Court to discard oral evidence of witnesses on the ground that they had been asked leading questions?
3. When a witness admits his handwriting and when signatories of such document admit their signatures on I, the learned Courts below were justified in not giving exhibit number to it as being admissible in evidence?
4. When a witness admits that he has written will in his own hand writing at the direction and request of the testatrix in presence of attesting witnesses, and after attestation, the author himself puts his attestation, was it not sufficient proof of valid execution of will?
5. Whether the learned Courts below have erred in recording that it can infer that the will was prepared in the office of an advocate, only on the basis of interference and in absence of any dispute raised by objector?
6. Whether the learned Courts below have committed error in reading and interpreting the contents of the disputed will vis.a.vis. depositions of witnesses.
7. Such other substantial question/s of law as may be framed by the Hon'ble Court at the time of hearing of the Appeal.Page 2 of 3
HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Aug 12 15:26:50 IST 2017 C/SA/201/2015 ORDER (RAJESH H.SHUKLA, J.) Girish Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Aug 12 15:26:50 IST 2017