Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.38 seconds)Section 68 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
A.P. Srivastava (Dead By Lrs.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 20 September, 1995
18. The counsel has argued that this judgment was rendered in respect of a contested unprivileged 'Will' and therefore, is not applicable in the instant case, it being an uncontested unprivileged 'Will'. On the same ground the counsel for the Petitioner has sought to distinguish S.S. Srivastava v. State and Ors. 2007 IV AD (Delhi) 314, wherein this Court has observed as under:
Janki Narayan Bhoir vs Narayan Namdeo Kadam on 17 December, 2002
21. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Janki Narayan Bhoir v. Narayan Namdeo Kadam (2003) SCC 91 has dealt with and considered exhaustively the provision contained in Section 63(c) of the Act.
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Section 63 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
State Of Punjab vs Sat Pal Dang & Ors on 30 July, 1968
24. The decisions cited by the petitioner at the bar do not further the case of the petitioner, in view of my finding that the document in question does not fall within the definition of a 'Will'. Satya Pal (Supra) in fact supports the view that I am inclined to take that the non-compliance of Section 63(c) is fatal to the claim that the document is a 'Will'.
Section 68 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Rajendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh& Others on 8 August, 1996
Rajendera Singh (supra) and the Gujarat Assembly Election Matter (supra) also do not support the petitioners contentions for the same reason.