Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court: Whether the third party can be absolved from contempt if they are informed that their conduct would violate the
Kerala High Court: In a matter, wherein a senior citizen has approached the Court with her grievance with respect to her son,
Jharkhand High Court: Expressing that the due execution of a Will is to be proved as per the provisions of law as
Uttaranchal High Court: Ravindra Maithani, J. dismissed an appeal that challenged an order given by the court of Civil Judge pertaining to
Gujarat High Court: A.P. Thaker, J. decided over a petition wherein the case of the petitioner was that the properties in question
Supreme Court: In a half a century old case relating to a Will, the bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and MM Sundresh,
Tripura High Court: T. Amarnath Goud, J., dealt with a petition wherein the case of the petitioner was that the respondent was
Bombay High Court: G.S. Kulkarni, J., addressed an ordeal of a senior citizen who would be soon in her nineties and was
Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., explained the concept of proving a Will by an attesting witness. The chamber appeal was preferred
“A testamentary court is not a court of suspicion but that of conscience.”
Supreme Court of India: Observing the well-settled position of law that, Mutation Entry does not confer any right, title or interest in
Supreme Court: Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., expressed that, Key characteristic of thumb impression is that every person
Delhi High Court: Mukta Gupta, J., decides a matter revolving around the Will of a deceased person. Factual Background Instant suit was
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. dismissed the appeal being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such
Delhi High Court: Rajiv Sahai EndLaw, J., while addressing a very significant issue revolving around ‘Will’ expressed that: Litigation in a Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J., disposed of a writ petition setting aside the orders passed by the Board of Revenue
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., has set aside the order of High
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Sandeep Sharma J., upheld the impugned judgment on merits. The facts of the case are such that the
Supreme Court: Explaining the requirement under Section 69 of the Evidence Act pertinent to Section 68 of the Evidence Act that the
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, Indu Malhotra and AS Bopanna, JJ has held that an agriculturist cannot part with