Dismissed
Shahenshabegum Alias Sona Diljag v. Rehana Nasruddin Abul Karim and Ors.
Bombay HCAPP/363/2009
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
THE HIGH COURT
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO. 363 OF 2009 IN MISC, PETITION NO. 5 OF 2007 IN
TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 786 OF 1994
Shahenshabegum @ Sona Diljag. ..Appellant. Versus Rehana Nasrudin Abul Karim & Ors. ..Respondents.
Mr. S. R. Mishra for the Appellant.
Mr. A. Narula i/b Jhagiani Narula & Associates for respondent nos. 1 & 5. Mr. Shaikh Yusuf Ali i/b S. Mahomedhbai & Co., for respondent nos. 2 to 4.
Coram : D. K. DESHMUKH & R. V. MORE, J. Date : April 27, 2010.
P. C. :
-: 2 :-
the learned Single Judge has given cogent reasons for the findings he has recorded. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the petition should not have been decided on the basis of affidavits and oral evidence should have been permitted. But admittedly, the appellant never made an application to the learned Single Judge to lead any oral evidence and for permission to cross examine the executor of the Will who was joined as respondent. Taking overall view of the matter, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order impugned. Appeal is
rejected.
(R.V. MORE, J.)
Shahenshabegum @ Sona Diljag
Rehana Nasrudin Abul Karim
D. K. DESHMUKH
R. V. MORE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court