Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 674 (5.73 seconds)
Documents citing Jaswant Kaur vs Amrit Kaur & Ors on 25 October, 1976

Defendant vs Smt. Charubala Ghosh on 28 April, 2022

―21. The propositions laid down in Venkatachala Iyengar [H. Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma, AIR 1959 SC 443 : 1959 Supp (1) SCR 426] have been followed and explained in another judgment of a Bench of three Judges in Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur [Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur, (1977) 1 SCC 369 : AIR 1977 SC 74] , wherein the law has been crystallised by Y.V. Chandrachud, J. (as he then was), into the following propositions : (Jaswant Kaur case [Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur, (1977) 1 SCC 369 : AIR 1977 SC 74] , SCC pp. 373-74, para 10) ―10. There is a long line of decisions bearing on the nature and standard of evidence required to prove a will.
Tripura High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - A Lodh - Full Document

S.R. Srinivasa & Ors vs S. Padmavathamma on 22 April, 2010

In our opinion, the High Court failed to examine the entire issue in accordance with the aforesaid principles laid down by this Court. We are, therefore, unable to uphold the impugned judgment. The appeal is allowed. Judgment of the High court is set aside and the judgment of the First Appellate Court i.e. the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Mysore is restored.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 144 - S S Nijjar - Full Document

V. Srisailam vs V. Krishna Murthy And Ors. on 20 November, 2002

136. It is nobody's case that sixth defendant who is propounder of the Will has taken predominant role in execution and registration of the Will. D.Ws.5, 6 and 7 in one voice state that sixth defendant was not at all associated with execution of the Will. This is a strong circumstance in favour of propounder and against caveators that there are no suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will. There is a long line of decisions of the Apex Court and various High Courts that when a propounder takes active part in execution and registration of a Will, the burden lies on the propounder to remove and explain all suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will. If the propounder has not taken any active or predominant part in execution or registration of the Will, the presumption must be in favour of the propounder that there are no suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will. As laid down by the Supreme Court in Venkatachala Iyengar v. Thimmajamma (supra) and Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur (supra) in the absence of any suspicious circumstances, the proof of Will is simple Us. Even if any suspicious circumstances are alleged, it is for the Court to satisfy its conscience on consideration of evidence whether the Will was executed by the testator. After anxious consideration of the rival submissions and in the light of evidence on record, I am satisfied that execution of the Will is proved and there are no suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 50 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Mira Gupta vs Dinesh Chand (Deceased) Thr Lrs & Ors on 27 August, 2024

"22. We may notice that in Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur, (1977) 1 SCC 369 this Court pointed out that when the Will is allegedly shrouded in suspicion, its proof ceases to be a simple lis between the plaintiff and defendant. An adversarial proceeding in such cases becomes a matter of Court's conscience and Propounder of the Will has to remove all suspicious circumstances to satisfy that Will was duly executed by Testator wherefor cogent and convincing explanation of suspicious circumstances shrouding the making of Will must be offered.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - C D Singh - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next