Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 48 (0.50 seconds)
Documents citing P. Manavala Chetty And Five Ors. vs P. Ramanujam Chetty And Anr. on 25 January, 1966

Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax vs Balijepalli Sridevamma on 19 January, 1987

In Manavala Chetty v. Ramanujam Chetty [1971] 1 MLJ 127, the testator under the will apart from other properties bequeathed a right of residence in the house to the wife and no provision had been made with regard to the residuary estate and in the context of considering whether the widow got absolute right in the house, Ramamurthi J. held as follows :
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - B P Reddy - Full Document

Nandakishore And Ors. vs State By Ashoknagar Police, Bangalore ... on 19 March, 2002

In Chetty and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr., 1991 Cri. L.J. 3017 (All.), the Allahabad High Court has held "where the applicant moves an application before the Magistrate with a simple prayer that the police officer concerned may be directed to register a case under a particular section and prayer for further direction was made that the police officer concerned may also proceed in accordance with law, cannot be termed as complaint as defined under Section 2(d) of the Code. The Magistrate has no power to proceed to examine the applicant and the witnesses under Section 200 in the absence of any formal complaint in this regard".
Karnataka High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - M P Chinnappa - Full Document

Paul Singh vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 10 November, 2014

PC-42/07 Page:-19/39 Similarly, in (1971) 1 MLJ 127 P. Manavala Chetty V. P. Ramanujan Chetty, it has been further held as under: "9..... It is the obvious duty of the Court to ascertain and given effect to the true intention of the Testator and also avoid any construction of the Will which will defeat or frustrate or bring about a situation which is directly contrary to the intentions of the Testator. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that there are obvious limits to this doctrine that the court should try to ascertain and give effect to the intentions of the testator. The law requires a will to be in writing and it cannot, consistently with this doctrine, permit parol evidence or evidence of collateral circumstances to be adduced to contradict or add to or vary the contents of such a will. No evidence, however, powerful it may be, can be given in a court of construction in order to complete an incomplete Will, or project back a valid will, if the terms and conditions of the written will are useless and ineffective to amount to a valid bequest, or to prove any intention or wish of the testator not found in the Will. The testator's declaration or evidence of collateral circumstances cannot control the operation of the clear provisions of the Will. The provisions of the Succession Act referred to earlier indicate the limits of the court's power to take note of the testator's PC-42/07 Page:-20/39 declaration and the surroundings circumstances i.e. evidence of collateral circumstances."
Delhi District Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next