Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.36 seconds)
Subbulakshmi vs Ponnuthai on 10 November, 2025 cites

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

Hence, no inference of suspicious circumstances can arise. It is well settled principle that Court has duty to sit in the arm chair of the testator and assess. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Venkatachala Iyengar v. B.N. Thimmajamma, reported in AIR 1959 SC 443, has reiterated that, while examining the validity and naturalness of a testamentary disposition, the Court must place itself in the “armchair of the testator” and consider the surrounding circumstances as they would have appeared to the executant. Applying these settled principles, This Court considered the above circumstances sitting in the testator's arm chair and holds that the case of the appellant Nos 2 and 3 that the testator had considered the death of their father at the young age after contributing his entire life to the development of the agricultural properties from his tender age as admitted by P.W.1 to be true and also the cogent evidence about the case of the appellants that the deceased Ramasamy Gounder sold the valuable property and the said consideration was appropriated by the third plaintiff. this Court is required to adopt the viewpoint of the executant, Ramaswamy gounder, 43/69 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/12/2025 06:12:56 pm ) A.S.(MD).No.156 of 2020 and examine the circumstances prevailing at the time of execution of the Will. The evidence demonstrates that his son Bhaskaran had died young, leaving behind two minor children who were residing with the testator and dependent upon him. The bequeathed property is adjacent to the land earlier cultivated by Bhaskaran, making it suitable for continued enjoyment by his family. Applying above settled principles, this Court finds that the exclusion of the plaintiff, by itself, cannot give rise to any adverse inference and there was an apparent natural disposition in the Will and hence there is no ground to hold that unnatural disposition leads to suspicious circumstances. The bequest is natural, reasonable and consistent with the testator’s life circumstances, as he intended to secure the interest of the minor children of deceased Bhaskaran, whose lands are adjacent to the suit property. In view of the above discussion, it is clear that Will was natural and the execution in the fit state of mind was proved with proper explanation of alleged suspicious circumstances .
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 1203 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

Madhukar D. Shende vs Tarabai Aba Shedage on 9 January, 2002

21.1.The learned Trial Judge, upon appreciation of the evidence, had observed that there were two suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of the Will. However, such a finding is unsupported by any material and therefore, this court has to analyze the evidence. The learned Judge had discussed about the suspicious circumstances without pleadings and the evidence. There was a clear pleadings about the execution of the Will and D.W.2 and D.W.3 clearly deposed about the 64/69 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/12/2025 06:12:56 pm ) A.S.(MD).No.156 of 2020 metal condition and execution of the Will. The learned Judge also accepted their evidence and gave a finding that D.W.1 duly proved the execution of the Will. Having found that Dw1 proved execution of will by accepting D.W.2 and 3, the learned trial judge without pleading and evidence, about testator's imbalanced mind due to nervous problem on assumption and surmise erroneously held that testator had imbalanced mind which leads to interference with impugned judgment by this court under section 96 of C.P.C., as final court on fact and law. Mere use of a thumb impression cannot infer lack of mental capacity. suspicion cannot substitute proof as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following paragraph in the case of Madhukar D. Shende v. Tarabai Aba Shedage, reported in (2002) 2 SCC 85:
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 302 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Jaswant Kaur vs Amrit Kaur & Ors on 25 October, 1976

B.N. Thimmajamma, AIR 1959 SC 443, Rani Purnima Debi v. Kumar Khagendra Narayan Deb, (1962) 3 SCR 195 Jaswant Kaur v. Amrit Kaur, (1977) 1 SCC 369, Kavita Kanwar v. Pamela Mehta, 2021 (11) SCC209, Ramabai Padmakar Patil v. Rukminibai Vishnu Vekhande [(2003) 8 SCC 537] Sridevi v. Jayaraja Shetty, reported in (2005) 2 SCC 784 it is no longer res integra that a Will is a solemn document intended to alter or depart from the natural line of testamentary succession. Deviation from natural succession is inherent in the very nature of a Will. Therefore, the mere deprivation of a legal heir from his or her due share cannot, in isolation, be treated as a suspicious circumstance. It is the duty of the Court, as a Court of conscience, to scrutinize the Will by adopting a rational and holistic approach, keeping 37/69 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 10/12/2025 06:12:56 pm ) A.S.(MD).No.156 of 2020 in view the background facts and surrounding circumstances of the case. 14.2.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 431 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document
1   2 Next