The petitioner challenged probate of a will dated 14.01.2004 in his favour. The Court noted that since the will named another son as executor, probate could not be granted to the petitioner under Section 222 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to institute a properly constituted petition.
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.
$~27
Through: Ms.Mithila Jain, Mr.Amit Shanker Amist & Mr.Gaurav Gagerna, Advocates
versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: None.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R
% 13.02.2020
PRATEEK JALAN, J
FEBRUARY 13, 2020/ „hkaur‟ /
2 issues framed by the court
Whether probate can be granted to the petitioner when the will appoints another son of the deceased as executor under Section 222 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
Whether the withdrawal of the petition seeking probate should be allowed with liberty to file a properly constituted petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Bathija
State & Ors.
Prateek Jalan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
