Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.33 seconds)Section 63 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Gnanambal Ammal vs T. Raju Ayyar And Others on 21 October, 1950
In AIR 1991 SC 103 between "Gnambal
Ammal v/s T.Raju Iyer and others" it was held that
"cardinal maxim to be observed by courts in construing
a Will is to endeavor to ascertain the intention of the
testator. This intention has to be gathered primarily
from the language of the document which is to be read
as a whole without indulging in any conjecture or
24
O.S.No.5714/2017
speculation as to what the testator would have done if
he had been better informed or better advised. In
construing the language of the Will, the courts are
entitled and bound to bear in mind the other matters the
merely in words used. They must consider the
surrounding circumstances, the position of the testator,
his family relationship, the probability that would used
the words in a particular sense and many other things
which are often summed up in some what picturesque
figure. The court is entitled to put itself in to the
testator's arm chair. But, all these is solely as an aid to
arriving at a right construction of the Will, and to
ascertain the meaning of its language when used by
particular testator in that document, so soon as the
construction is settled, the duty of the court is to carry
out the intention as expressed and none other. The
court is in no case justified in adding to testamentary
dispositions. In all cases, it must loyally carry out the
Will as properly construed and this duty is universal, and
25
O.S.No.5714/2017
is true alike of Will of every nationality and every
religion or rank of life."
J T Surappa S/O Late J S Thimmappaiah vs Sri Satchidhananadendra Saraswathi ... on 16 April, 2008
In ILR 2008 KAR 2115 between Sri.J.T.Surappa
and another v/s Sri.Satchidhanandendra
Saraswathi Swamiji Public Charitable Trust and
others" the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka held that
"a careful path in the enquiry to be conducted with
regard to Will. The path consists of 5 steps "Pancha
Padi". The path of enquiry and steps to be traversed are
as under:-
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 200 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 59 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Section 143 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
Section 144 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925 [Entire Act]
H. Venkatachala Iyengar vs B. N. Thimmajamma & Others on 13 November, 1958
In view of the dispute between the parties to the
suit is concerned, it is necessary to look in to a decision
reported in AIR 1959 Supreme Court 443 between
"Venkatachala Iyengar v/s B.N.Thimmajamma and
others" it was held that "unlike other documents the
Will speaks from the death of the testator, and so, when
it is propounded or produced before a Court, the testator
who has already departed the world cannot say whether
it is his Will or not; and this aspect naturally introduces
an element of solemnity in the decision of the question
21
O.S.No.5714/2017
as to whether the document propounded is proved to be
the last Will and testament of the departed testator.
Even so, in dealing with the proof the Wills, the court will
starts on the same enquiry as in the case of the proof of
the documents. The propounder would be called upon
to show by satisfactory evidence that the Will was
signed by the testator, that the testator at the relevant
time was in a sound and disposing state of mind, that he
understood the nature and effect of he dispositions and
put his signatures to the document of his own free will.
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." Therefore, the burden
of proof of execution of Will lies upon the propounder of
the Will i.e., the plaintiff.