Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Supreme Court Rejects Claim of Adoption and Will in Property Dispute: “Multiplicity of Suspicious Circumstances” Undermines Legitimacy

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Moturu Nalini Kanth vs. Gainedi Kaliprasad (dead through LRs.), dismissed the appeal of Moturu Nalini Kanth, who claimed rights over properties based on a contested Will and Adoption Deed. The judgment, delivered by Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, highlighted “a multitude of suspicious circumstances” surrounding the alleged adoption and the execution of the will.

The apex court meticulously examined the evidence surrounding the Adoption Deed (Ex. A9) and Will (Ex. A10) of the late Venkubayamma. The Bench noted that despite the registration of Ex. A9 Adoption Deed, its authenticity was successfully challenged by the respondent. “The very adoption, itself, is not believable, given the multitude of suspicious circumstances surrounding it,” the judgment stated, casting doubt on the legal processes claimed to have been followed in the adoption of Nalini Kanth.

Furthermore, the judgment scrutinized the execution of the Will (Ex. A10). The Court pointed out significant inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses and the documentation of the Will. It was observed that the Will was not proved in accordance with the law, thereby nullifying its legal standing. The Court remarked, “In effect, Ex. A10 Will was not proved in accordance with law and it can have no legal consequence.”

This decision affirms the stance of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which had earlier ruled against Nalini Kanth. The Supreme Court’s observation emphasizes the importance of adhering to the legal requirements in matters of wills and adoptions, underlining the necessity of clear, consistent, and credible evidence to uphold such claims. The judgment serves as a precedent in cases involving disputes over wills and adoptions, reinforcing the rigorous standards required for their validation.

Date of Decision: 20th November 2023

MOTURU NALINI KANTH VS GAINEDI KALIPRASAD (DEAD, THROUGH LRS.) 

Latest Legal News