Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.29 seconds)Section 24 in The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956
The Insurance Act, 1938
Smt. Sarabati Devi & Anr vs Smt. Usha Devi on 6 December, 1983
In the case of Smt Sarabati Devi & Another
Vs Smt Usha Devi (1984) 1 SCC 424, Hon'ble Apex
court has held that a nomination under the Life
Insurance Act, 1938, did not contemplate a
statutory testament and the amount paid to a
nominee on the death of the policy holder would
form part of the estate of the deceased. This
would eventually devolve upon the heirs in
accordance with the personal law of succession
applicable to the deceased.
Ram Chander Talwar & Anr vs Devender Kumar Talwar & Ors on 6 October, 2010
In the case of Ram
Chander Talwar & Anr. v. Devender Kumar
Talwar & Ors., (2010) 10 SCC 671 Hon'ble Apex
court had rejected the argument that the non-obstante
clause granted the nominee absolute ownership of the
subject matter to the exclusion of legal heirs.
Interpretation of the general words and phrases used
in a stat ute must be according to the objects of the
statute and not read in isolation. Application of the
61 O.S.No.4816 of 2011
non-obstante clause must be in accordance with the
scheme of the legislation. Hon'ble Apex Court
observed that the non-obstante clause in this case
served the singular purpose of allowing the company
to vest the shares upon the nominee to the exclusion
of any other person to discharge its liability against
diverse claims by the legal heirs of the deceased
shareholders. This arrangement would be temporary,
until the legal heirs have settled the affairs of the
testator and are ready to register the transmission of
shares, by due process of succession law.
Section 39 in The Insurance Act, 1938 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 [Entire Act]
Section 45ZA in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
Employees Provident Funds Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952
1