Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.45 seconds)Section 306 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Section 1 in Legal Representatives' Suits Act, 1855 [Entire Act]
Section 166 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan vs Thekittil Gopalankutty Nair on 29 November, 1985
Paragraph 8 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan v. Thekittil Geopalankutty Nair (supra), as reported in the AIR, is quoted hereinbelow:
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Smt. Bhagwati Bai And Anr. vs Bablu @ Mukund And Ors. on 4 November, 2006
So far as the full bench judgment of the Karnatka High Court in Uttam Kumar's case is concerned, there can be no quarrel with regard to the proposition of law laid down therein with regard to the claim based on personal injury in view of Section 306 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 is concerned, however the said decision does not consider the other aspect relating to the loss caused to the estate of the deceased in the light of the provisions of the Act of 1855, which have been considered by the full bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt. Bhagwati Bai's case (supra).
Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag & ... vs Mst. Katiji & Ors on 19 February, 1987
So far as the other reason given by the learned Tribunal for rejecting the applications, i.e. the delay/ limitation in filing the same is concerned, this court is of the view that in view of averments made in the application for condonation of delay, there was sufficient cause for condoning such delay and the Tribunal erred in taking a very narrow and strict view of the matter whereas in fact it should have taken a liberal view. Reference may be made in this regard to the Supreme Court judgment reported in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Katiji, AIR 1987 SC 1353. The reason given in the application for condonation of delay was that after the death of late Radhey Shyam Sharma, the legal heir/ wife was in a state of depression and anxiety on account of which she could not file application for substitution within a reasonable period and it is only after being able to come out of the mental anxiety and trauma of his death, she filed the application, which, according to the Tribunal, was delayed by 118 days. In the facts and circumstances, there was sufficient explanation for the delay as such the said order of the learned Tribunal is not sustainable even on this count.
Uttam Kumar (Deceased) vs Madhav And Anr. on 27 March, 2002
So far as the full bench judgment of the Karnatka High Court in Uttam Kumar's case is concerned, there can be no quarrel with regard to the proposition of law laid down therein with regard to the claim based on personal injury in view of Section 306 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 is concerned, however the said decision does not consider the other aspect relating to the loss caused to the estate of the deceased in the light of the provisions of the Act of 1855, which have been considered by the full bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt. Bhagwati Bai's case (supra).