Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 92 (1.62 seconds)
Documents citing Vasudev Daulatram Sadarangani vs Sajni Prem Lalwani on 1 March, 1983

Jatinder Singh Bedi vs State Etc on 1 June, 2026

(g) of para 16 of the judgment in the case of Vasudev Daulatram Sadarangani v. Sajni Prem Lalwani, AIR 1983 Bom 268 which is referred to in para 15 of the judgment in the case of Kunvarjeet Singh Khandpur (supra) and that it is sub-para (d) of the said para 16 which is to be taken with reference to the earlier paras of the judgment in Kunvarjeet Singh Khandpur (supra) case which refer to Article 137 of the Limitation Act and that a probate petition is to be filed within three years of arising of cause of action (or right to apply) i.e when the Will is disputed by other side."
Delhi District Court Cites 43 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document

(Madhabi Kundu Since Deceased) & Ors vs Subhra Kundu & Ors on 7 July, 2025

18. Applying the law laid down, in the aforesaid decision and theobservations made hereinabove, the submission on behalf of the 16 2024:CHC-AS:2493-DB appellants thatProbate Case No. 15 of 2001 filed by Respondent 2 for letters of administrationunder Section 228 of the Act, read with Section 276 of the Act is barred by law oflimitation, cannot be accepted.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - R Mantha - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next