Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.35 seconds)
Documents citing D.D.A. vs Dr. K.K. Srivastava on 12 January, 2004

Delhi vs Sh. Asha Ram S/O Late Sh Bhola Ram on 18 July, 2012

27. The plaintiff has proved the judgment of probate Ex. PW1/X. The aforesaid judgment is conclusive with respect to proof of Will of deceased Sobha Ram in favour of plaintiff. However, the law relied upon 16 CS No 192/12 by the counsel for defendant as laid in DDA vs. Dr. K.K. Srivastava 109(2004) DLT 8498 and in Kanwarjit Singh Dhillon vs. Hardayal Singh Dhillon, JT 2007 (13)SC 50, clearly hold that the probate court cannot give any declaration of title of the properties as mentioned in the Will. The probate court also cannot decide that the deceased had valid title to the properties as mentioned in the Will.
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ajay Malhotra vs State on 15 May, 2019

7. The Respondents on the other hand have opposed the application stating that the Petitioner has wilfully and deliberately concealed information about the factum of joint or exclusive ownership of Respondent no. 2 in the properties mentioned in the document dated 26th October 2017. Further, it has been argued that Court does not determine or decide title in a probate petition and hence, the Petitioner cannot obtain an order of injunction against Respondent no. 2 who is owner of 50% share in the properties and owner in her own right in some of the properties. Respondents have placed reliance on the judgments of this Court in Talat Parveen Naqvi v Delhi Development Authority 163 (2009) DLT 622, DDA v Dr. K.K. Srivastava TEST.CAS. 37/2018 Page 6 of 15 109 (2004) DLT 849 (DB) and Administrator General v State & Ors. 237 (2017) DLT 469 in support of their submissions.
Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - S Narula - Full Document
1