Posts
Showing posts from June, 2020
Will cannot be disbelieved only because the testator had used a different pen than the pen used by the attesting witnesses
- Get link
- Other Apps
The testator signed only in last Page of will . But will has been proved all other aspects
- Get link
- Other Apps
Name and signature subscribed at the foot of the testamentary paper as the party executing the same are not the proper handwriting of the deceased - appellant had no case that all the seven years, her father was under the influence of his sons
- Get link
- Other Apps
The person contesting the will alleges undue influence, fraud or coercion, the onus will be on him to prove the same.
- Get link
- Other Apps
The validity and genuineness of Ex.A-2-Will was not at all in issue in the above suit. Therefore, the examination of one of the attesting witness to Ex.A-2-Will is not necessary
- Get link
- Other Apps
If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence
- Get link
- Other Apps
Only when conditions of Section prescribed in Section 65 are satisfied, documents can be admitted as secondary evidence
- Get link
- Other Apps
Will executed by Christians and muslims need not to be probated
- Get link
- Other Apps
signature of a person is proved on a document does not necessarily mean that person who has signed the document has done so after understanding contents of document.
- Get link
- Other Apps
without signature of the testator only with signature of attestar is enough for prove the will
- Get link
- Other Apps
Once title to the property is vested in the transferee by the sale of the property - Cannot be divested unto the transferor - by a deed of cancellation even with the consent of the parties.
- Get link
- Other Apps
An unregistered, unstamped document can be marked and relied on by the party for collateral purpose.
- Get link
- Other Apps
Unregistered sale deed can be admissible in evidence
- Get link
- Other Apps
Memorandum evidencing a family arrangement already entered into and document prepared as a record of what had been agreed upon, it need not be stamped or registered
- Get link
- Other Apps
An oral family arrangement does not require registration
- Get link
- Other Apps
sale deed deemed to have come into force on 2.8.1971, as the registration thereof dated 3.9.1971 would relate back to the date of execution which had been prior to institution of the suit
- Get link
- Other Apps
Suit for specific performance based on unregistered sale agreement is valid
- Get link
- Other Apps
suit for specific performance is maintainable and is not barred even though contract is not registered - It cannot be said that time is essence of contract
- Get link
- Other Apps
suit for specific performance and for a relief of permanent injunction based on an unregistered agreement of sale is valid
- Get link
- Other Apps
Whether proper court-fee is paid on a plaint is primarily a question between the plaintiff and the State
- Get link
- Other Apps
Appeal was settled out of court - party is entitled to full court fee
- Get link
- Other Apps
IT is permissible to refund court fees in a review petition under section 66 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 in cases where the delay in representation of the review petition has been rejected by the court
- Get link
- Other Apps
For filing appeal in enhancement of compensation, court fee has to be paid on the basis of the amount difference between amount awarded and amount claimed.
- Get link
- Other Apps
sale agreement is for 10 actors.In respect of 3 acrs sale deed executed. specific performance suit for 7 actors only plaintiff can pay court fee only in respect of 7 actors
- Get link
- Other Apps
The plaintiffs suit without seeking the relief of setting aside the sale deed date 27.08.1987 is unsustainable in the eyes of law
- Get link
- Other Apps
The relief in substance indirectly amounts to seeking for cancellation of the sale deed. The Trial Court was right in ordering payment of court fee by the Plaintiff under Section 40 of the Act
- Get link
- Other Apps
The plaintiff in the suit was not the executant of the sale deeds - Therefore, the court fee was computable under section 7(iv)(c) of the Act
- Get link
- Other Apps
Payment of the court fee is a mixed question of fact and law and, therefore, the plaint was not liable to be rejected by entertaining a petition as regards evaluation of the suit property
- Get link
- Other Apps
Suit for cancellation of sale deed - directing the appellant to pay court fee on the market value of the property, in respect of the sale deed are set aside is not correct - suit has to value based on the value mentioned in the sale deed
- Get link
- Other Apps
A co-owner under the law she is presumed to be in constructive possession of the property and as such court fee is to be paid on the deemed market value and not on actual market value
- Get link
- Other Apps
A co-owner under the law she is presumed to be in constructive possession of the property and as such court fee is to be paid on the deemed market value and not on actual market value
- Get link
- Other Apps
plantiff would have been in somewhere else , as co sharer is also be deemed to be in position of property, court fees paid only under section 37 (2)
- Get link
- Other Apps
Supreme court constitution bench judgement regarding court fee for partition suit
- Get link
- Other Apps
Decided the question of payment of court fee on the relief as a preliminary issue is affirmed.
- Get link
- Other Apps
Court fee issue can be raised as preliminary issue
- Get link
- Other Apps
There is neither any express provision for giving retrospective effect to amended provision nor necessary intendment to that effect
- Get link
- Other Apps
Provisions of Amended Section 6 are retroactive in operation, and daughter living on 9 September 2005 gets rights in coparcener property with effect from 9 September 2005 - Retroactive means it applicability not only future cases but it can applicable to pending cases.
- Get link
- Other Apps
Execution of will can be proved without examining attesting witness
- Get link
- Other Apps
குற்ற விசாரணை முறைச்சட்டம் 1973 பிரிவு 41,41A-இன் படி ஏழு ஆண்டுகள் வரை தண்டணை விதிக்கதக்க குற்றங்களில் குற்றா சாட்டப்பட்டவர்களை கைது செய்தாகவேண்டும் என்று (Not Mondatory) கட்டாயம் இல்லை
- Get link
- Other Apps
குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்ட எதிரிகள் பிணையாளர்கள் (Sureties) இல்லாமலே பிணையில் விடுவதற்கு நீதிமன்றத்திற்கு அதிகாரம் உண்டு.
- Get link
- Other Apps
Once the suit is barred under the Limitation Act, the Court thereafter cannot extend the time either under Section 148 or under Section 151 of CPC or under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act in depositing the balance of sale consideration
- Get link
- Other Apps
Court held that cannot extend time under sections 148 and 151 of C.P.C. when the time granted under the Limitation Act has already been expired
- Get link
- Other Apps
If time limit has been fixed for deposit balance consideration.If the Plaintiff has not deposit the balance amount within the period .He can apply for extension of time
- Get link
- Other Apps