Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.87 seconds)
Documents citing Banwarilal Shriniwas vs Kumari Kusum Bai And Ors. on 27 July, 1972

Arjundas S/O Narayandas Panjwani And ... vs Vera Mishra Of Bombay And Anr. on 26 October, 1994

Mr. Kanuga, next, cited decision in the case of Banwarilal Shriniwas v. Kumari Kusum Bai, , wherein a purchaser who acquired an interest in the estate of the testator, by reason of a transfer by the heirs at law, after his death, was held to be entitled to citation because he was a person who ought to have been cited as contemplated in illustration (ii) to section 263 of the Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sunil Gupta vs Kiran Girhotra & Ors on 9 October, 2007

This Court proceeded on the assumption that Banwarilal Shrinivas (supra) lays down the correct law. But even therein a distinction was made stating that the alienee was a transferee pendent lite. The said decision, therefore, is an authority for the proposition that no citation need be issued to any person who had no right to the property prior to the commencement of the probate proceedings. This Court in no uncertain term opined that the alienees had no right to be heard in the appeal The said decision, therefore, runs counter to the submission of Mr. Ramachandran.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 47 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Ms. Monica Maitra vs Sh. Sudip Kumar Lahiri & Another on 23 May, 2009

There is no dispute of the proposition that bare possibility of interest even though remote is sufficient to entitle person to oppose Will or apply for revocation of probate granted as held in Mutukdhari vs. Smt. Prem Debi AIR 1959 Patna 570, Nabin Chandra Guha vs. Nibaran Chandra AIR 1932 Calcutta 734 and Banwarilal Shriniwas vs. Kumari Kusum Bai AIR 1973 MP 69. It is also held in these cases that absence of citation on a person who ought to have been cited would be a defect of substance which will be deemed to be just cause for revocation of probate.
Delhi District Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Pramod Kumar & Ors vs Amar Krishna Basu & Ors on 9 November, 2015

Para-25. On behalf of the petitioner, two contentions were pressed with considerable force - (i) that citations were not issued to the respective Collectors and (ii) that there was non- compliance of the provisions of Sections 19-H and 19-I of the Court-fees Act. On behalf of the parties, a number of rulings were cited and some of which are : Moonga Devi v. Radha Ballabh, AIR 1972 SC 1471 ; Smt. Kamla Patna High Court TEST CASE No.7 of 1993 28/32 Devi v. Kishori Lal Labhu Ram, AIR 1962 Punj 196; Banwarilal Shriniwas v. Kumari Kusum Bai, AIR 1973 Madh Pra 69;
Patna High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S Pandey - Full Document
1   2 Next