Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.39 seconds)The State Of West Bengal & Anr vs Kailash Chandra Kapur & Ors on 29 November, 1996
We find from the decision in Kailash
Chandra Kapur (supra) that the Apex Court upon
interpreting Clause 2 (12) of the lease deed had held
that bequests by a Will was not prohibited in case of
leasehold properties of Salt Lake and the same is a
binding precedent for us. We cannot accept the
submission of the Learned Advocate General that the
Apex Court in Kailash Chandra Kapur(supra) had
not taken into consideration, the proposition of law
that a Will was a posthumous disposition of the
property and that the definition of a Will should be
read in the context of the restrictive covenant in
Clause 2 (8) of the lease deed. We find that the Apex
Court had elaborately dealt with such proposition of
law which was precisely the submission of the
learned Additional Solicitor General in that case
before the Apex Court. We hold that the lessees in
respect of Salt Lake properties have an unrestricted
right to bequeath the leasehold interest by way of a
Will to any person and no fruitful purpose will be
5
served by making any further enquiry into the
motive behind such Wills."
S. Rathinam @ Kuppamuthu & Ors vs L.S. Mariappan & Ors on 18 May, 2007
8. That the beneficiary of a Will receives
the property by way of devolution and not by
way of transfer is also made clear by the
decision of this Court in S. Rathinam alias
Kuppamuthu v. L.S. Mariappan [(2007) 6 SCC
724] wherein this Court has held in para 21
that a testator by his Will, may make any
disposition of his property subject to the
condition that the same should not be
inconsistent with the laws or contrary to the
policy of the State. The Will of a man is the
aggregate of his testamentary intentions so
far as they are manifested in writing. It is not
a transfer but a mode of devolution.
Mahadeo(Dead Thr. Lrs.) vs Shakuntalabai on 15 December, 2016
Mahadeo v. Shakuntalabai the Apex Court once
again reiterated the ratio of the judgement of Kailash
Chandra Kapur(supra) which reads as follows:-
Delhi Development Authority vs Mrs. Vijaya C. Gurshaney & Anr on 26 August, 2003
In fact, it was held
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi
Development Authority Vs. Vijaya C.
Gurshaney (Mrs.) & Anr. (supra) in the case of
Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of
Haryana & Anr. (supra), that such enquiry is
necessary as the dishonest transferor very
often to defraud the State Exchequer enter into
property deal with the dishonest transferee in
the guise of Power of Attorney Sale,
Agreement for sale with a General Power of
Attorney or living will transfer. On perusal of
these judgments it appears to me that such an
inquiry in the present case will result in futility
as the state respondent never intended to put
any restriction on transfer by way of bequest
in the lease which is under consideration
before me unlike the cases which were before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein transfer of
any description, without permission of the
authority was totally prohibited."
Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ld.Tr.Dir vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 11 October, 2011
In fact, it was held
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Delhi
Development Authority Vs. Vijaya C.
Gurshaney (Mrs.) & Anr. (supra) in the case of
Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of
Haryana & Anr. (supra), that such enquiry is
necessary as the dishonest transferor very
often to defraud the State Exchequer enter into
property deal with the dishonest transferee in
the guise of Power of Attorney Sale,
Agreement for sale with a General Power of
Attorney or living will transfer. On perusal of
these judgments it appears to me that such an
inquiry in the present case will result in futility
as the state respondent never intended to put
any restriction on transfer by way of bequest
in the lease which is under consideration
before me unlike the cases which were before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein transfer of
any description, without permission of the
authority was totally prohibited."
Beru Ram And Ors. vs Shankar Dass And Ors. on 10 March, 1998
9. The decision of the High Court is,
therefore, not sustainable in view of the law
laid down by this Court."
Mr. Swapan Kumar Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Others on 29 November, 2019
Other coordinate Benches have followed the decision,
one such being the decision in the matter of Swapan
Kumar Das versus State of West Bengal and Others,
reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Cal 3817. The relevant
portion is quoted below:
The State Of West Bengal & Ors vs Smt. Kusum Agarwal & Anr on 20 July, 2018
In the decision of Pawan Kumar
Agarwal(supra) a similar point fell for consideration
before a learned Single Judge of this Court and the
Learned Judge had elaborately dealt with all the
decisions cited by the appellants and held that if a
Will had all the ingredients of a valid Will as per the
Indian Succession Act, it could not be treated as an
instrument of assignment and/or gift. The relevant
portion is quoted below:-
1