Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.33 seconds)

H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs B. N. Thimmajamma & Others on 13 November, 1958

In H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs. B.N. Thimmajamma and others, AIR 1959 SC 443, it was observed : “……. Ordinarily when the evidence adduced in support of the will is disinterested, satisfactory and sufficient to prove the sound and disposing state of the testator’s mind and his signature as required by law, Courts would be justified in making a finding in favour of the propounder. In other words, the onus on the propounder can be taken to be discharged on proof of the essential facts just indicated.”

M.B. Ramesh (D) By Lrs vs K.M. Veeraje Urs (D) By Lrs. & Ors on 3 May, 2013

12. The main defence of the defendants 1 to 4 is that the first defendant along with her husband had executed two Wills on 09.07.2013 in respect of northern and southern half shares of the suit property. The plaintiff has specifically denied and disputed the alleged Wills under Exs.B.1 and B.8. Before entering into further discussion, it is necessary to refer the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.R.Ramesh (Dead) by L.Rs Vs. K.M.Veeraje Urs (Dead) by L.Rs and others reported 11/31 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 02:44:54 pm ) S.A.(MD)No.305 of 2021 in 2013(7) SCC 490, wherein it has been held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 86 - Full Document
1