Supreme Court of India Judgements

46830 Judgements hosted as on 01/08/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Will & Succession

Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 14(1) – Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute property – Objective of Section 14(1) – There cannot be a fetter in a owner of a property to give a limited estate if he so chooses to do including to his wife but of course if the limited estate is to the wife for her maintenance that would mature in an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the said Act.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JOGI RAM — Appellant Vs. SURESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Will & Succession

If a property of a male Hindu dying intestate is a self acquired property or obtained in partition of a co-parcenery or a family property, the same would devolve by inheritance and not by survivorship, and a daughter of such a male Hindu would be entitled to inherit such property in preference to other collaterals. Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Sections 14 and 15 – Partition of properties – Right of daughter to father’s property – If death of father in prior to enforcement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Law of inheritance under Hindu Succession Act, 1956 are applicable.

Jan 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ARUNACHALA GOUNDER (DEAD) BY LRS — Appellant Vs. PONNUSAMY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. )…

Will & Succession

IMP : Succession Act, 1925 – Section 63 – Proof of wills – Has the testator signed the will? Did he understand the nature and effect of the dispositions in the will? Did he put his signature to the will knowing what it contained? Stated broadly it is the decision of these questions which determines the nature of the finding on the question of the proof of wills. It would prima facie be true to say that the will has to be proved like any other document except as to the special requirements of attestation prescribed by Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MURTHY AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. C. SARADAMBAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…

Will & Succession

Succession Act, 1925 – Section 63 – Execution of unprivileged Wills — The person claiming to be scribe of the Will as well as the two attesting witnesses deposed to support the case of the original plaintiff, but both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court disbelieved their testimony. The thumb impression of ‘K’ was not matched. There was contradiction in the evidences of attesting witnesses as regards the place of execution. The requirement of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 cannot be said to have been fulfilled by mechanical compliance of the stipulations – – An enquiry of such nature was impermissible while hearing an appeal under S 100 of the CPC

Nov 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF HARYANA — Appellant Vs. HARNAM SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose,…

Will & Succession

Succession Act, 1925 – Section 70 – Revocation of unprivileged Will – In view of Section 70, revocation can be made only by following modes: (a) By Execution of another Will or codicil. (b) A writing executed by the testator declaring an intention to revoke the Will and executed in the manner in which an unprivileged Will is required to be executed. (c) By burning, tearing or otherwise destroying the same by the testator or by some person in his presence and by his direction with the intention of revoking the same.

Oct 31, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  BADRILAL — Appellant Vs. SURESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 6524…

Will & Succession

Indian Succession Act S 63 & Indian Evidence Act S 68 have been duly complied with in proving Exhibit P4 (Will). HELD due execution of Exhibit P4 is accepted as against Exhibit D1. Exhibit P4 also cannot be questioned by the Respondent No. 1 who is none other than the erstwhile brother-in-law of the Appellant. Respondent No. 1 & 2 merely rely upon Exhibit D1 which is rightly found to be not genuine by both the Courts. We feel that the Appellate Court has not considered the relevant materials and substituted its own views when not warranted either on facts or law.HELD due execution of Exhibit P4 is accepted as against Exhibit D1. Exhibit P4 also cannot be questioned by the Respondent No. 1 who is none other than the erstwhile brother-in-law of the Appellant. Respondent No. 1 & 2 merely rely upon Exhibit D1 which is rightly found to be not genuine by both the Courts. We feel that the Appellate Court has not considered the relevant materials and substituted its own views when not warranted either on facts or law.

Oct 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V. PRABHAKARA — Appellant Vs. BASAVARAJ K. (DEAD) BY LR. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…

Will & Succession

Succession Act, 1925 – Section 273(b) – Partition suit – Transfer of – Virtue of Proviso (b) of Section 273 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, any letters of administration granted by the District Court, Saket cannot have effect in other States unless the value of the property affected by the grant and located beyond the limits of the State, does not exceed Rs.10,000/.

Feb 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH RAVINDER NATH AGARWAL — Appellant Vs. YOGENDER NATH AGARWAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) Transfer Petition (Civil) No.…

Will & Succession

Succession certificate – Transfer of proceedings – Parties shall produce the copy of the Settlement Agreement and the copy of this order before the Court where the proceedings are pending or before the Authorities who hold the properties of the deceased or the companies which owe money or in which shares are held by the deceased, so that they act accordingly to the satisfaction of both the parties

Feb 13, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH KRITI AGARWAL — Appellant Vs. VEENA RASTOGI — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 166 of 2019 Decided…

You missed

I P C

Criminal proceedings may be quashed if allegations, even when uncontroverted, fail to establish an offense, considering freedom of speech and assembly.

Aug 1, 2025 sclaw
I P C

Criminal proceedings can be quashed if a civil dispute is disguised as a criminal offense, indicating an abuse of process. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 — Cheating, Forgery, Using Forged Document — Abuse of process of law — Civil dispute disguised as criminal offence — Complaint filed after significant delay following dismissal of objections and failure to pursue civil remedies — Allegations of fabrication of will and circumvention of sale deed not prima facie made out — Continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and not serve ends of justice — High Court erred in refusing to quash — Order set aside and proceedings quashed.

Aug 1, 2025 sclaw
I P C

Criminal proceedings may be quashed if cheating or criminal breach of trust elements are absent, or if civil disputes are wrongly criminalized, amounting to abuse of process.- Section 420 — Cheating — Ingredients not made out — Agreement to Sell for property was executed, but possession was not handed over as stipulated in the ATS — No fraudulent or dishonest inducement found — Criminal proceedings quashed.

Aug 1, 2025 sclaw
Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Tenth Schedule, Para 6(1) — Disqualification of Members — Speaker’s authority to decide — Judicial review of Speaker’s decision — Scope of — Decision of Speaker is amenable to judicial review on grounds of jurisdictional errors, mala fides, non-compliance with natural justice, and perversity. Delay in deciding disqualification petitions — Speaker’s duty to decide expeditiously — Held, Speaker is bound to decide disqualification petitions within a reasonable period.

Aug 1, 2025 sclaw