Case BriefsHigh Courts

Punjab & Haryana High Court: Appellant had prayed before the Bench of Surinder Gupta, J., that the Will made by mother of both the parties was illegal, null and void being obtained by the respondent under undue influence, coercion, misrepresentation and that she was incompetent to make Will of conjoint property.

The Trial Court had upheld the Will executed by the mother and suit of the appellant was dismissed. It was submitted that both the parties had equally contributed to purchase the land though it was purchased on their mother’s name who could not have purchased the land being a household lady. Thus, Will executed by her was illegal being obtained under undue influence, coercion, misrepresentation. Trial Court found the Will to be validly executed and thus under Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the mother was the absolute owner of the suit property and was competent to execute the Will. Statement of account was brought before Court as proof that the appellant had contributed to the sale of the property.

High Court was of the view that even if the financial contribution was done for sale the transaction cannot be said to be Benami transaction. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed and Courts below have not committed any error in stating that Will was valid, registered and rightly executed. [Dharam Singh v. Anil Kumar, 2019 SCC OnLine P&H 428, decided on 23-04-2019]

Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: Responding to the Notice issued by the bench of J.S. Khehar, CJ and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J asking the Centre and the Reserve Bank of India to consider the option of allow the deposit of the old Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes to those who were not able to deposit the demonetised notes due to genuine and compelling reasons, the Centre and the RBI said that the last window for depositing the demonetised notes cannot be allowed as it will defeat the purpose of demonetisation and the efforts of eliminating black money. It was submitted that if the window is allowed, it could result into increase in benami transactions for producing and depositing old notes and it will make it difficult for departments to distinguish genuine cases from bogus ones.

Earlier this month, stating that genuine cases deserve a chance to deposit the old notes, the Court had explained that if a person was in jail during the period and was not able to deposit the notes without any fault of his then how can such person be barred.

Source: HT